THE 


SCRIPTURE  MODE 


OP 


BAPTISM 


ASCERTAINED   TO   BE   SPRINKLING. 


s- 


SCRIPTURE   MODE 


BAPTIS 


ASCERTAINED  TO  BE  SPRINKLING, 

IN  TWO  PARTS. 

I.    THE  MODE    OF    WATER    BAPTISM. 
II.    THE   TAPTISM    OF   THE    HOLY    SPIRIT. 

DESIGNED  FORPLAIN  READERS. 


BY  REV.  J.  A.  CORNWALL, 

OF  THE  OREGON  PRESBYTERY. 


LOUISVILLE,  KY. : 
PRINTED     BY     A.     F.     COX. 

For  sale  at  the  Rooms  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Book  Concern. 

1856. 

St 
/  A  • 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/scripturemodeofbOOcorn 


RESOLUTION  OF  THE  OREGON  PRESBYTERY, 

Passed  at  the  Spring  Session  of  1855. 

Whereas,  Brother  J.  A.  Cornwall  has  been  for  some 
time  engaged  in  preparing  a  work  for  the  press,  upon  the 
subject  of  Baptism,  adapted  expressly  to  the  wants  of 
our  Church  in  Oregon  ;  and  has  at  this  Session  of  the 
Presbytery  given  an  outline  of  his  work,  (in  the  form  of 
a  lecture)  :  therefore, 

Resolved,  unanimously,  That  so  far  as  the  Presbytery 
have  been  made  acquainted  with  the  manner  in  which 
said  work  is  gotten  up  and  arranged,  they  are  free  to 
recommend  it  to  the  members  of  our  Church  generally, 
and  to  those  in  Oregon  in  particular. 

Jas.  H.  D.  Henderson,  Mod. 
A.  W.  Sweeny,    Clerk. 


r4^. 


1 

TO    THE  READER. 


The  following  is  rather  a  compilation  than  an 
original  work  on  Baptism.  Most  of  the  articles 
have  been  carefully  selected  from  the  best  writers 
upon  the  subject.  The  introduction  to  chapters, 
a  general  introduction,  and  some  of  the  articles 
are  original.  The  work  professes  to  combine  the 
chief  excellencies  of  Drs.  E.  Hall  and  A.  Peters, 
of  New  England,  and  Dr.  Edward  Beecher,  for- 
merly of  Illinois  College.  To  distinguish  him 
from  his  reverend  sire,  I  have  chosen  to  designate 
him  in  this  work  as  Pres.  Beecher.  He  has  pushed 
the  investigation  of  the  subject  further,  perhaps, 
than  any  other  man,  and  done  more  than  any 
other  towards  settling  the  controversy,  by  ascer- 
taining the  truej  import  of  the  original  terms 
employed  and  the  design  of  the  ordinance.  I  have 
drawn  more  liberally  from  his  pages  than  from  any 
other  work.     I  have  also  extracted  freely  from 


VI  TO  THE  READER. 

Dr.  Rice's  part  of  the  celebrated  debate  by  Rice 
and  Campbell,  held  in  Lexington,  Ky.,  in  1843. 
Moreover,  I  have  availed  myself  of  several  articles 
by  other  writers  upon  the  subject  of  baptism. 

The  plan  of  the  work  is  this •  Part  First,  (on 
the  Mode  of  Baptism)  the  first  chapter,  includes 
the  institution  of  the  ordinance,  the  present  state 
of  the  controversy,  the  origin  of  immersion,  etc.; 
the  second  and  third  chapters  are  devoted  to  the 
import  of  baptizo  and  baptismos.  The  second 
gives  the  philological  difinition,  and  the  third  the 
scriptural  definition  of  these  terms.  The  fourth 
chapter  embraces  the  arguments  directly  upon  the 
mode  of  baptism,  and  the  fourth  is  composed  of  the 
historical  illustrations  of  the  modes  drawn  from  the 
New  Testament  and  the  early  history  of  the 
Church. 

Part  Second  contains  twoa  chapters  upon  the 
subject  of  Spiritual  Baptism.  And  it  is  contem- 
plated, should  the  life  of  the  author  be  spared  a 
little  longer,  to  add  a  Third  Part  to  the  work,  to 
include  the  Scripture  Warrant  for  the  membership 
and  baptism  of  infants. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  work,  I  have  been 
careful   on  the  one  hand,  to  omit  nothing  that 


TO    THE  READER.  Vll 

appeared  actually  necessary  to  the  elucidation  of  the 
subject,  and  on  the  other,  to  prevent  its  becoming 
too  lengthy  to  suit  common  readers.  Should  any 
one,  however,  conclude  that  it  is  too  much  for  his 
time  and  patience,  he  may  pursue  the  following 
course  of  reading,  and  still  obtain  a  good  degree 
of  information  upon  the  subject  of  baptism.  Begin 
with  the  description  of  baptism  at  the  close  of  the 
introduction,  (page  25,)  then  take  up  Chapters  III 
and  IV  of  the  First  Part,  and  Chapter  II  of  the 
Second  Part.  He  then  will  be  very  likely  to  turn 
back  with  interest  enough  to  peruse  the  whole. 

May  the  Great  Head  of  the  Church  bless  this 
feeble  effort  in  the  dissipation  of  error  and  false- 
hood, and  the  dissemination  of  the  truth. 

Yam  Hill  Co.,  Oregon  Territory, 
July  4ik,  A.  D.  1855. 


CONTENTS 


' '*^H  jRw^f* 


Page. 

Introduction,  -------13 

Description  or  Design  of  Baptism,  21 

PART    I. 

THE     MODE     OF    BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER   I. 

General  Remarks,      ------       25 

§  1.  The  Institution  of  Baptism,  26 

§  2.  Present  Position  of  the  Baptists  and  State  of 

the  Controversy,       -  -  -  -       30 

§  3.  Inference  from  the  Opposite  System,     -  33 

§  4.  Causes  which  led  to  the  early  practice  of  Im- 
mersion, and  to  the  Doctrine  of  Baptismal 
Regeneration,  -  -  -  35 

§  5.   Statement    of  the  Case,    and   principles    of 

Investigation,  -  -  -  40 

§  6.  Causes  of  the  Disregard  of  these  Principles, 

and  the  Consequences,         -  -  42 

CHAPTER   II. 

Import  of  the  Word  Bapizo  and  its  Derivatives. — 

Philological  Definition           -              -  46 
§  7.  The  Jewish  Idiom  of  the  Greek  Language,   -  49 
§  8.  Translating  the  word  Baptizo,          -  54 
§  9.  Transferring  Peculiar  Words  from  one  Lan- 
guage to  Another,     -             -             -  57 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

§  10.  Meaning  of  Bapto  —  the  Root,  -  61 

§  11.  Import  of  the  Word  Baptizo,  -  -  64 

§  12.  Process  by  which    Words  pass  from  one 

Meaning  to  another,               -  -  -  70 


CHAPTER    III. 

Import  of  Baptizo. — The  Scripture  Idea  of  Bap- 
tism,   -  -  -  -  -       76 

§  13.  The  Sacrificial  Sense  of  Baptizo     -  -       77 

§  14.   Old    Testament  Prophecies  —  Expectation 

that  the  Messiah  would  Purify  or  Baptize,     -       80 

§  15.  New  Testament    Definition  of   Baptizo    or 

Baptize,        -  -  -  -  -       84 

§  16.  Definition    @f    Baptizo  —  Apocrypha    and 

Josephus,     -  -  -  -  90 

§  17.  Definition  of  Baptizo  and  Baptisma,  as  given 

by  the  Fathers,         -  -  -  93 

§  18.  Relation  to  System  of  Writers,       -  -       98 

§  19.  The  Final  Result  — Purification,     -  -     101 


CHAPTER   IV. 

The  Scripture  Mode  of  Baptism,              -              -  107 

§20.  Jewish  Purification  —  Baptism,       -             -  108 

§21.  Levitical  Purification  —  Baptism,  -             -  115 
§  22.  Purification     by     the    Blood    of   Christ- 
Sprinkling,  -             -             -             -             -119 
§  23.  Purification  by  the  Holy  Ghost — Baptism 

by  Pouring  and  Sprinkling,      -         -              -  124 

§  24.  Language  of  Prophecy  —  Sprinkling          -  129 

§  25.  Use  of  the  Prepositions  —  Sprinkling,        -  135 
§  26.  Baptism  of  Blood,  of  Fire,  of  Tears,  and 

of  the  Truth  — Sprinkling,      -                      -  139 


CONTENTS.  XI 

CHAPTER   V. 

Page. 
Historical  Illustrations  of  the  Mode  of  Baptism,  145 
§  27.  Nature  and  Design   of  John's   Baptism  — 

Baptism  of  Christ,       -  -  -     146 

§  28.  Mode  of  John's  Baptism —  Sprinkling       -     150 
§  29.  Baptism  of  Three  Thousand  on  the  Day  of 

Pentecost  —  Sprinkling,        -  156 

§  30.  Baptism   of  the  Eunuch   and    of  Christ  — 

Sprinkling  —  The  Greek  Particles  translated 

into  and  out  of,  -  -     159 

§  31.  Other  instances  of  Apostolic  Baptism  —  the 

Apostle  Paul,  Cornelius,  Lydia,  the  Jailer,  and 

two  other  Cases — Sprinkling,     -  -     165 

§  32.  Testimony  of  History  —  Sprinkling,  -     169 

§  33.  Recapitulation,       -  .  -  173 

PART    II. 

SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM. 

CHAPTER    I. 

The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  -  -  -  178 

§  34.  The  Reality  of  Spiritual  Baptism,  -  -  179 

§  35.  The  Perpetuity  of  Spiritual  Baptism,  -  184 

§  36.  The  Author  or  Agent  employed  in  Spiritual 

Baptism,      -  -  -  -  -  188 

§  37.  The  Means  Employed  in  Spiritual  Baptism,  193 

§  38.  The  Nature  of  Spiritual  Baptism,  -  -  199 

§  39.  And  the  Effects  of  Spiritual  Baptism,         -  204 

CHAPTER    II. 

Interpretation  of  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12,    -     210 
§  40.  Importance  of  a  Correct   Interpretation   of 

Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12,  -       -  -     210 


Xll  CONTENTS. 

Page. 

§  41.  Points  at  Issue  —  Principles  of  Reasoning,     213 
§  42.  Position  to  be  Proved  —  Sources    of  Evi- 
dence, -..-.     214 
§  43.  Course  of  the  Argument,  and  Logical  Exi- 
gencies,       -  216 
§  44.  The  Mode  of  Speech  employed,  as  to  Spiritual 

Death,  Burial,  Resurrection,  etc.,      -  -     221 

§  45.  The  Congruity  of  the  Interpretation  with 

the  General  System  of  Truth,   -  -     229 

§  46.     The  Moral  Tendency  and  Effects  of  Each 

Mode  of  Interpretation,         -  -  -     232 

§  47.  Objections  from  Authority  Considered.       -     236 
§  48.  Apostolic  Practice  Considered,        -  -     239 

§  49.  The  Final  Result,     -  -  -     240 


rv 


y6 


\ 


wm 


INTRODUCTION. 


It  is  natural  to  expect  some  apology  for  engaging  in 
the  discussion  of  the  subject  of  baptism  at  the  present 
time,  when  there  is  so  much  said  and  written  upon  that 
perplexing  controversy.  Mine  is,  I  have  long  felt  the 
need  of  a  work  on  baptism,  suited  to  the  wants  of  common 
readers,  who  compose  the  mass  of  community,  as  well  as 
a  large  majority  of  church  members.  So  far  as  I  am 
acquainted,  most  of  the  works  extant  are,  in  my  opinion, 
either  too  long  or  too  learned  to  suit  that  respectable 
class  of  readers  ;  or  they  are  too  short  to  afford  the  infor- 
mation necessary  upon  that  difficult  subject.  Rendered 
difficult  by  so  much  discussion  of  a  character  better  calcu- 
lated to  darken  the  subject,  and  to  divide  the  Body  of 
Christ,  than  to  elucidate  the  subject  thus  obviously  ren- 
dered perplexing.  Besides,  a  standard  work  on  baptism 
is  still  a  desideratum  in  our  branch  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Moreover,  the  present  advanced  state  of  biblical 
literature  imperiously  demands  such  a  work.  Truth  is 
evidently  in  a  state  of  continual  development.  It  is  a  fact 
well  known  to  Bible  students  generally,  that  a  great  many 
texts  of  scripture,  which  were  formerly  understood  to 
refer  to  material  or  water  baptism,  evidently  refer  to 
spiritual  baptism  or  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the 
heart  of  the  believer  ;  and  are  still  retained  in  some  of  the 
most  popular  works  on  baptism,  and  in  some  of  the  best 
notes  and  comments  on  the  sacred  pages  ;  also  in  more 
than   half  the   references   in    our    Confession  of  Faith. 


14  INTRODUCTION'. 

Furthermore,  the  great  diversity  oi  views  entertained  by 
the  members     f   CI  >ible    church    respecting  an 

ordinance  of  the  New  Testament,   is   a  subject  of  deep 
I  calls  loudly  upon  all  pa:  contribute 

their  respective  mites,  in  the  way  of  Christian  forbear- 
tnd  compromise,  to  bring  about  that  state  of  recon- 
ciliation and  fraternal  feeling,  so  desirable  in  this  present 
ncement. 
It  is  painful  to  reflect  that  each  party  manifests  such  an 
unyiel       _        .  ompromising  we  are  often  called 

to  witz.es such  f  exclusion.     For  instance: 

Inline:        lists,  with  the  great  -  lence,  denounce  all 

unbaptized  :    and   arrogate  to  themselves  the 

exclusive  right  to  settle  the  mode  pttsm,  and  to  give 

::dthful  translations  of  the  word  of  God 
accordingly.      While  a  few  of  our  Pedobaptist  brethren 

-  rigid  and  dogmatical,  in  their  exclusion 
and  proscription.  Now  in  my  view,  they  are  equally 
extravagant,  in  setting  up  their  respective  claims  to  infal- 
libility. —  _  _  use  above  what  is  written,"  and 
forming  hasty  conclusions,  without  reaching  them  by  a 
regular  induction  of  facts.  This  spirit  of  entire  exclusion, 
if  carried  out  retrospectively,  would  inevitably  uncharch 
both  parties.  For  it  is  a  fact  too  no:  admit  of 
denial,  that  the  practice  of  immersion  as  a  mode  of  bap- 
tism, prevailed  almost  universally,  at  a  very  early  age  of 
the  Christian  Church.  So  that  the  opposers  of  this 
mode,  by  pushing  the  subject  too  far,  may  trace  his  favor- 
ite mode,  through  by-gone  generations,  till  he  arrives  at 
the  period  when  sprinkling  was  not  recognized  as  a  mode 

*  of  emergency — the  baptism  of  persons 

conn-  7 :1s    of    sickness,  supposed  to   be   beyond 

recovery.     On  the  other  hand,  the  advocate  for  immersion 

e  only  mode  of  Christian  baptism,  may  trace  his 

baptism  to  difterent  periods  in  the  history  of  the  Church, 


INTRODUCTION.  15 

when  sprinkling  generally,  if  not  universally  prevailed. 
Hence,  upon  this  plan  of  exclusion  and  proscription, 
both  parties  are  necessarily  subjected  to  the  same  incon- 
venience of  excluding  themselves  from  the  Church  of 
Christ,  and  thus,  so  far  as  a  regular  succession  is  con- 
cerned, depriving  themselves  of  Christian  baptism,  as  the 
unavoidable  consequence. 

Under  the  existing  state  of  things,  more  uniformity  of 
sentiment  is  desirable,  upon  a  subject  in  theology  of  such 
vast  importance  ;  and  should  be  attained  as  soon  as 
possible.  And  we  are  persuaded  that  it  is  attainable  ; 
for  it  is  not  the  will  of  God  that  any  part  of  revealed 
truth  should  long  remain  involved  in  clouds  and  darkness. 
And  we  think  with  Pres.  Beecher,  that  such  an  uni- 
formity will  ultimately  be  effected  by  the  recognition  of 
all  the  modes  of  baptism  now  practiced  among  evangeli- 
cal Christians  as  valid.  But  whether  they  all  can 
produce  equal  claims,  with  respect  to  the  design,  signifi- 
canty,  convenience,  etc.,  involves  another  question,  and 
entirely  distinct.  But  to  arrive  at  the  truth  upon  the 
subject,  it  becomes  necessary  to  divest  ourselves,  as  far  as 
possible,  of  our  former  modes  of  thinking,  association  of 
ideas,  prejudices,  and  so  on  ;  and  to  turn  to  the  great 
commission  given,  and  inquire,  Is  the  command  to  bap- 
tize specific  and  modal  ?  or  is  it  open  or  generic  ?  For 
instance  :  Is  it  specific,  as  go  sprinkle  all  nations  ?  or  go 
immerse  all  nations  ?  Or  is  it  an  open  command  ?  as  go 
baptize,  go  wash,  go  purify  all  the  nations  ?  The  answer 
is  at  hand.  The  command  is  not  specific  and  modal,  but 
generic,  and  may  be  performed  by  any  mode  of  applica- 
tion, as  by  sprinkling,  pouring,  or  immersion.  Let  each 
branch  of  Christ's  Church  choose  whatever  mode  may 
suit  its  convenience  best,  and  every  member  exercise 
Christian  liberty,  and  select  that  particular  mode  which 
best  suits  his  or  her  particular  views,  and  exercise  a  spirit 


16  INTRODUCTION. 

of  charity  and  Christian  forbearance  towards  all  others 
who  may  differ  from  him  in  sentiment,  and  the  desirable 
object  is  at  once  attained.  And  if  the  great  Head  of  the 
Church  recognizes  the  external  ordinance  administered  in 
different  modes  —  as  we  are  persuaded  he  does  —  and 
vouchsafes  the  inward  grace,  why  not  we  too  recognize 
it,  extend  to  all  the  hand-  of  fellowship,  and  greet  them 
with  a  hearty  welcome  into  the  visible  family  of  God  ? 

The  inquiry  then  naturally  arises,  Why  then  investigate 
the  subject  at  all  ?  if  we  admit  that  the  command  to  bap- 
tize is  fully  met  by  any  mode  of  application  of  water  ? 
The  answer  to  this  is  also  at  hand,  and  is  two-fold  :  (1.) 
Our  Baptist  brethren  deny  that  we  are  baptized  persons  ; 
and  of  course  we  are  out  of  the  visible  Church,  and  not 
entitled  to  a  participation  with  them  in  the  ordinance  of 
the  Supper.  And  therefore  they  will  not  accord  to  us  the 
privileges  of  Christian  fellowship  —  which  is  the  legitimate 
right  of  all  God's  children, —  nor  even  an  equal  share  of 
common  intelligence.  (2.)  The  dogma  of  exclusive 
immersion  has  ever  been  a  fruitful  source  of  errors  of  the 
most  vital  nature,  from  the  baptismal  regeneration  *  of 
the  primitive  Church  to  the  Campbellism  and  Mormonism 
of  the  present  day. 

A  great  many  Pedobaptists  have  been  at  a  loss  to  ac- 
count for  the  rise  and  prevalence  of  the  doctrine  of 
immersion  and  baptismal  regeneration  at  so  early  an  age 
of  the  Christian  Church;  for  they  are  twin  sisters,  and 
generally  go  hand  in  hand.  This  subject  will  receive 
ample  attention  at  the  jDroper  place  in  the  work.  (See 
§  4.)  I  will  merely  remark  here,  that  the  doctrine  in 
question,  so  dishonoring  to  God  and  so  subversive  of  vital 
piety  in    the   Church,  is  evidently  an  innovation   upon 

*This  doctrine  as  taught  by  the  Fathers,  was  of  a  different  type,  and 
not  of  that  vital  character  of  Campbellism  of  modern  times. 


INTRODUCTION 


17 


primitive  practice.     But  we  come  now  more  directly  to 
the  subject  of  discussion. 

Baptizo  and  baptismos  —  the  original  terms  for  baptize 
and  baptism  —  are  of  Greek  origin,  and  were  not  trans- 
lated in  our  New  Testament,  except  in  some  three  or 
four  instances,  but  merely  transferred,  with  the  English 
terminations  ize  and  ism.  The  wisdom  of  God  is  mani- 
fest in  the  selection  of  a  word  from  a  polished  language, 
which  had  never  been  employed  by  the  Greeks  themselves 
in  a  religious  sense,  and  consecrating  it  to  the  service  of 
the  sanctuary,  to  signify  a  divine  rite  —  the  emblem  of  a 
sacred  purification  —  through  all  coming  time.  Should 
not  this  remarkable  circumstance  administer  a  gentle 
rebuke  to  all  who  are  so  clamorous  against  Pedobaptists  ; 
charging  them  with  mistranslating  the  Scriptures  with 
the  obvious  design  of  suppressing  the  truth,  and  mislead- 
ing the  people  upon  the  subject  of  baptism  ?  And  .should 
it  not  be  a  hint  to  all  who  are  engaged  in  the  translation 
of  the  Word  of  God,  to  imitate  these  venerable  men  who 
prepared  our  English  version,  and  transfer  the  original 
terms  with  suitable  terminations,  into  all  the  languages 
and  dialects  of  earth  ;  and  thus  preserve  the  original  term 
as  a  universal  one,  indicating  a  standing  ordinance  of  the 
Church  ?  For  to  transfer  words  from  one  language  to 
another  is  not  to  mistranslate  them,  but  merely  to  enlarge 
and  enrich  another  language.  The  words  Messiah, 
Emanuel,  Christ  and  Jesus,  were  all  transferred  from  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  into  English  ;  and  the  words  immerse 
and  immersion,  were  in  like  manner  transferred  from  the 
Latin  ;  and  so  of  a  multitude  of  our  English  words.  They 
were  introduced  from  other  languages,  both  living  and 
dead. 

But  what  renders  the  word  baptizo  more  difficult  to 
ascertain,  is  not  the  simple  fact  that  it  belongs  to  a  for- 
eign language,  but  also  to  a  dead  one.     The  ancient  Greek 

2 


18  INTRODUCTION. 

has  long  since  ceased  to  be  a  living  spoken  language  ;  and 
the  additional  fact,  that  the  New  Testament  was  not  writ- 
ten in  classic  Greek,  but  in  what  may  be  termed  the 
Jewish  idiom  of  the  Greek  language  ;  or  what  is  called 
in  the  schools,  the  Alexandrian  Greek.  And  it  is  worthy 
of  remark  that  while  it  remained  a  living  language,  there 
was  no  controversy  whatever  with  regard  to  baptism. 
Although  the  Greek  Fathers  wrote  so  much,  and  npon 
every  subject  in  theology,  still  not  a  trace  exists  concern- 
ing any  controversy  about  baptism.  This  shows  con- 
clusively that  this  controversy  is  one  of  modern  date. 
Hence  the  necessity  that  the  anxious  inquirer  after  the 
truth  as  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  should  travel  back  into 
the  New  Testament  age,  and  become  acquainted,  as  far  as 
possible,  with  all  the  circumstances  connected  with  the 
subject ;  such  as  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  among  the 
surrounding  nations,  political  changes,  manners  and 
customs,  religious  ceremonies,  modes  of  thought,  etc. 
And  especially  an  acquaintance  with  the  Greek  Fathers, 
who  lived  and  wrote  for  several  successive  centuries  after 
the  Apostolic  age,  will  be  of  great  service  in  arriving  at 
the  true  import  of  the  term  baptizo,  and  its  derivatives. 
For  there  is  no  one  truth  more  evident  than  that  every 
man  —  especially  every  learned  man  —  is  acquainted  with 
his  own  mother  tongue,  in  which  he  was  born. 

The  conquests  of  Alexander,  about  three  centuries 
before  the  Christian  era,  by  which  the  Greek  language 
became  general  throughout  the  East,  and  the  translation 
of  the  Old  Testament  scriptures  into  that  language  a  short 
time  after  —  called  the  Septuagint  version  —  were  some 
of  the  steps  pursued  by  Divine  Providence  in  preparing 
the  way  for  the  gospel  dispensation.  By  these  means,  the 
Greek  language  became,  so  to  speak,  the  circulating 
medium  of  divine  truth,  and  was  now  applied  to  a  subject 
altogether  new.     Hence  it  is,  that  a  great  many  words 


INTRODUCTION.  1§ 

have  passed  from  tlieir  primary  meaning  —  from  a  com- 
mon or  profane  use,  to  that  of  a  secondary  or  religious 
application  ;  and  thus  assumed  a  sense  which  the  heathen 
Greeks  never  attached  to  them  ;  —  and  baptizo  among 
the  rest.  This  important  word  appears  to  be  left  entirely 
out  of  view,  by  a  great  many,  in  discussing  the  subject  of 
baptism.  Writers  generally,  of  both  sides  of  the  question, 
will  resort  to  the  classical  usage  of  the  terms  employed, 
and  confine  them  to  their  primary  meaning,  at  the  same 
time  making  them  specific,  as  dip,  plunge,  immerse,  etc. ; 
on  the  other  hand,  the  definition  is  extended  in  its  appli- 
cation, so  as  to  include  wash,  pour,  sprinkle,  etc.,  making 
them  also  specific  and  modal. 

Now  it  is  evident  that  this  mode  of  procedure  will 
never  bring  about  that  unity  which  is  the  mind  of  the 
Spirit,  and  at  the  same  time  so  desirable  among  Chris- 
tians. Thus  it  is,  that  both  parties  lose  sight  of  the  New 
Testament  or  religious  application  of  the  term — baptizo 
■ —  to  wash,  cleanse,  purify,  which  is  generic,  and  may  be 
performed  by  any  mode  of  application.  Pres.  Beecher 
says  ■:  "  The  Septuagint,  the  New  Testament,  and  the 
Greek  Fathers,  belong  to  one  system  of  writers.  The 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  were  affected  by  the  Septu- 
agint, in  their  style  and  use  of  words.  The  Fathers  were 
affected  by  both." 

Baptism  is  an  ancient  rite  or  Jewish  practice  ;  and  it 
was  employed  both  for  ceremonial  purposes  and  the  intro- 
duction of  Gentile  proselytes.  As  such,  John  practiced 
the  rite  under  the  Levitical  dispensation.  And  the  Sa- 
viour, in  the  institution  of  Christian  baptism,  did  not 
introduce  a  new  rite  into  the  Church,  but  employed  an 
old  one,  already  in  use  and  well  understood,  with  a  mean- 
ing somewhat  different  and  more  significant. 

There  are  likewise  some  circumstances  connected  with 
baptism,  which  are  worthy  of  notice,  as  peculiar  to  the 


20  INTRODUCTION. 

first  age  of  Christianity  :  such  as  faith  as  a  prerequisite  to 
baptism,  its  connection  with  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
its  connection  with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  is 
said  in  connection  with  the  commission  to  baptize,  "  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved."  Leaving 
the  inference  clear,  according  to  the  views  of  the  Baptist 
brethren,  that  infants  and  all  others  incapable  of  the 
exercise  of  faith,  are  not  proper  subjects  of  that  ordinance  : 
thus  arriving  at  a  false  conclusion,  by  being  misled  in  the 
premis3s.  The  facts  are  these  :  the  wall  of  partition  that 
had  hitherto  separated  between  the  Jew  and  the  Gentile, 
was  now  taken  down,  and  the  gospel  was  to  be  preached 
also  to  the  Gentiles,  who  were  henceforth  to  be  fellow- 
heirs  with  the  Jews,  in  the  covenant  of  promise  and 
privileges  of  the  Church.  In  the  discharge  of  the  great 
commission,  adults,  who  are  capable  of  faith,  are  ad- 
dressed ;  and  they  are  required  first  to  believe,  and  then 
to  be  baptized, —  they  and  their  children.  There  must 
first  be  a  beginning,  in  laying  the  foundation  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  among  the  Gentiles.  So  the  allusion  in  that 
and  similar  texts,  is  to  the  faith  of  the  adult  alone,  as  a 
prerequisite  to  baptism  ;  and  it  is  both  unfair  and  im- 
pertinent, to  bring  that  objection  to  bear  upon  the  subject 
of  the  baptism  and  membership  of  infants. 

It  was  said  to  the  convicted  Jews,  in  Peter's  sermon 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  "  Repent  and  be  baptized,  every 
one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission 
of  sins."  And  under  circumstances  somewhat  similar 
Ananias  said  unto  Saul,  "  Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and 
wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord." 
In  these  passages,  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,  in 
some  sense  or  other,  is  brought  to  view  ;  which  has  a 
reference  peculiar  to  the  age,  the  circumstances,  and  to  the 
Individuals  addressed.  For  in  all  the  instances  recorded 
of  the  Apostles'  preaching  to  the  Gentiles,  no  such  Ian- 


INTRODUCTION,  21 

guage  anywhere  occurs.  When  Peter  in  his  discourse 
charged  the  Jews  with  the  sin  of  crucifying  their  own 
Messiah,  they  were  cut  to  the  heart,  and  cried,  Men  and 
brethren,  what  must  we  do  ?  The  answer  Avas,  Repent 
and  be  baptized,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  —  in  that 
very  name  which  you  have  scornfully  rejected  and  blas- 
phemed, saying  "  Away  with  him  ;  crucify  him,  crucify 
him  ;  his  blood  be  upon  us  and  our  children."  Baptism 
in,  or  into  the  name  of  Christ,  is  a  solemn  recognition  of 
Christ,  and  a  formal  union  with  his  body,  the  visible 
Church.  And  this  act  was  to  those  Jews,  his  guilty 
murderers,  the  only  terms  upon  which  their  sins  could  be 
pardoned  or  remitted,  particularly  the  sin  of  renouncing 
the  only  name  by  which  men  may  be  saved,  and  crucify- 
ing the  Lord  of  Life  and  Glory.  The  case  of  Saul  of 
Tarsus  was  somewhat  similar.  He  had  been  a  wicked 
persecutor  of  the  saints,  and  had  also  rejected  and  blas- 
phemed the  name  of  Christ.  But  he  was  now  a  penitent 
at  the  door  of  mercy.  And  he  trembling,  and  astonished, 
said,  ''Lord  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ?  "  And  he 
was  directed  by  Ananias  to  arise  forthwith  and  be  bap- 
tized, calling  on  that  very  name  for  pardon  and  reconcilia- 
tion, and  then  to  wash  away  that  foul  blot  from  his 
conscience  and  his  character  —  the  particular  sin  of  blas- 
phemy and  persecution.  This  I  take  to  be  the  primary 
meaning  of  these  texts,  which  have  long  been  a  source  of 
contention.  It  is  admitted,  however,  that  there  may  be 
at  the  same  time  a  secondary  reference  to  the  general 
meaning  of  baptism,  as  significant  of  pardon  and  remis- 
sion. According  to  this  view,  these  passages  are  of  easy 
solution  and  of  a  peculiar  application. 

And  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  all  the  plenitude  of 
his  miraculous  powers,  wTas  likewise  peculiar  to  the  Apos- 
tolic age  ;  and  was  generally  conferred  at  the  time  of 
baptism,  by  the  imposition  of  hands.     But  in  the  case  of 


22  ,  INTRODUCTION. 

Cornelius  and  his'companions,  the  Holy  Ghost  was  shed 
forth  upon  them  before  the  administration  of  water  bap- 
tism. Now  this  gift  or  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
appears  to  have  been  the  immediate  province  of  Christ 
himself  —  in  that  age  —  and  for  a  special  purpose;  and 
it  was  conferred  either  through  the  intervention  of  means, 
or  independent  of  all  instrumentality ;  and  it  ceased  alto- 
gether in  its  extraordinary  character  as  soon  as  its  objects 
were  accomplished.  It  enabled  its  possessors  to  speak 
with  other  tongues,  to  prophesy,  and  to  work  miracles, 
and  appears  not  to  have  been  confined  exclusively  to 
regenerated  persons,  but  to  havejbeen  shared  to  some 
extent,  by  mere  nominal  professors.  But  these  miraculous 
gifts  ought  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  baptism 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  it  is  continued  in  the  Church  at  the 
present  day;  and  which  unites  the  soul  to  Christ,  and 
thus  identifies  the  believer  with  his  mystical  body  —  the 
Church  invisible.  This  spiritual  baptism  seems  to  be  the 
immediate  province  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  his  diversified 
operations,  and  is  to  be  perpetuated  in  the  Church  through 
all  succeeding  ages, 

And  finally,  it  only  remains  to  add  a  brief  description 
of  the  design  or  intention  of  baptism,*  as  brought  to  view 
in  the  New  Testament,  which  corresponds  in  several 
particulars  with  the  more  ancient  rite  of  circumcision 
under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation. 

Baptism  is  an  ordinance  of  the  Christian  Church.  It 
has  often  been  described,  as  the  application  of  water,  in 
any  mode,  by  an  authorized  minister  of  the  gospel,  to  a 

*  I  will  here  enter  my  protest  against  the  doctrine  of  immersionists 
generally,  that  baptism  is  designed  to  bo  a  standing  monument  of  tho 
Saviour's  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  This  idea  directly  intrudes 
one  of  the  ordinances  of  the  Christian  Church  upon  the  province  of 
another  —  that  of  the  Supper.  I  will  also  protest  against  the  idea  of 
Christ's  being  baptized  for  an  example  to  believers  ;  and  against  there 
being  any  command  to  follow  him  in  the  ordinance  of  baptism. 


INTRODUCTION.  23 

proper  subject,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  this  is  at  best  a  very  vague 
and  indefinite  definition  or  description  of  the  ordinance  of 
baptism  ;  and  therefore,  I  submit  the  following  : 

1.  Baptism  is  the  rite  of  initiation  into  the  Church  of 
Christ.  It  is  making  a  public  profession  of  Christianity, 
by  coming  out  from  the  world,  and  becoming  formally 
united  to,  and  identified  with,  the  people  of  God.*  Paul 
thus  describes  the  baptism  of  John,  (Acts  xix,  4)  : 
"  John  verily  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  repentance, 
saying  unto  the  people,  that  they  should  believe  on  him, 
which  should  come  after  him,  that  is,  on  Christ  Jesus." 

2.  Baptism  is  also  an  outward  sign  or  emblem  of  an 
inward  or  spiritual  cleansing,  and  a  seal  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  faith.  Rom.  iv,  11.  The  person  is  baptized  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Acts  ii, 
29;  xxii,  16,)  which  is  "through  faith  in  his  blood,  so 
that  God  is  just  and  the  justifier  of  him  that  believeth  in 
Jesus. :'  Rom.  iii,  25,  26.  It  seals  to  the  person  baptized, 
all  the  promised  blessings  of  the  new  covenant,  which, 
on  the  part  of  God,  will  be  afforded  in  due  time. 

3.  And  baptism  into  Jesus  Christ,  or  into  the  body  of 
Christ,  is  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  purifies 
the  heart  of  the  believer,  unites  the  soul  to  Christ  the 
living  Head,  and  identifies  it  with  his  mystical  body  — 
the  Church  invisible.  1  Cor.  xii,  13;  Gal.  iii,  27.  It  is 
also  a  death  to  sin,  and  a  resurrection  to  a  new  and  holy 
life.  Rom.  vi,  3,  4;  Col.  ii,  12;  iii,  3.  This  is  the 
reality  —  the  antitype  of  water  baptism  ;  and  is  in  fact 
the  remission  of  sins,  effected  by  the  "washing  of  regene- 
ration and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

*  With  regard  to  infants.  Baptism  is  the  dedication  of  the  children 
of  the  Church  to  God.  by  bringing  them  into  covenant  union  with  him, 
and  thus  placing  the  seal  of  the  covenant  upon  them,  in  the  name  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  :  that  the  needed  blessing  —  spiritual  purification  —  may 
be  fbrth-rcming  in  duo  eeason. — Acteii,  39, 


PART  I. 


THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 

General  Remarks. 

All  denominations  of  Christians,  except  one,  recognize 
the  rite  of  baptism  performed  in  any  of  the  modes  usually 
practiced,  as  valid  :  viz.,  sprinkling,  pouring,  or  immer- 
sion ;  still  they  do  not  at  the  same  time  admit  that  it  is 
wholly  a  matter  of  indifference  as  to  the  mode  of  admin- 
istration. On  the  other  hand,  they  deem  it  a  matter  of 
the  very  first  importance,  in  view  of  the  vast  consequences 
involved.  They  regard  immersion,  it  is  true,  as  a  valid, 
but  an  awkward  and  inconvenient  mode  ;  not,  indeed, 
because  it  is  immersion,  but  simply  because  it  is  one  mode 
of  purification.  But  it  so  happens  that  almost  all  who 
believe  in,  and  practice  immersion  in  modern  times, 
oppose  the  baptism  and  membership  of  infants  ;  and  that, 
not  as  a  necessary  consequence,  for  formerly  infants  as 
well  as  adults  were  immersed.  Still  there  is  something 
connected  with  immersion  which  is  incompatible  with 
the  time-honored  practice  of  infant  baptism.  Moreover, 
immersion  as  a  mode  of  baptism,  is  not  adapted  to  the 
propagation  of  the  Gospel,  agreeably  to  the  Saviour's  last 
command,    in   northern   latitudes.     Hence   we   give   the 


26  EUL    REMARK 5. 

decided  preference  to  sprinkling*  as  a  mode  of  baptism, 
the  most  convenient  for  all  climes  and  conditions  in  life, 
as  well  as  the  most  appropriate  and  significant,  and  the 
one  chosen  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  symbolize  spiritual 
purification. 

§1. — The  Institution  of  Baptism. 
The  last  command  of  our  Saviour  to  his  disciples,  was 
addressed  to  them  after  his  resurrection,  when,  having 
finished  his  personal  ministry  on  earth,  he  was  about  to 
ascend  his  throne,  The  occasion  was  solemn  and  memo- 
rable. "  Then  the  eleven  disciples  went  away  into  Galilee, 
into  a  mountain  where  Jesus  had  appointed  them.  And 
when  they  saw  him  they  worshiped  him,  but  some 
doubted.  And  Jesus  came  and  spake  unto  them,  saying, 
All  power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  Go 
ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I 
have  commanded  you  :  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  Mat.  xxviii,  16-20. 
This  command  is  recorded  by  another  evangelist,  and  in 
different  words  :  "  And  he  said  unto  them,  go  ye  into  all 
the  world,  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature,  he  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that  believ- 
eth  not  shall  be  damned."  Mark  xvi,  15,  16. 

*  The  use  of  the  word  sprinkling  in  preference  to  aspersion,  affusion, 
or  pouring,  is  because  it  is  more  familiar  in  common  parlance,  and  is 
used  in  Scripture,  to  express  the  mode  of  baptism,  as  it  is  generally 
practiced.  It  is  also  a  better  translation  of  the  Greek  word  Rantizo  in 
the  Septuagint,  and  as  used  by  the  Apostle,  Heb.  ix,  10,  in  reference 
to  the  "  divers  washings"*  prescribed  under  the  law.  I  wish  it  to  be 
understood,  however,  that  I  mean  by  the  word  any  application  of  water 
to  the  subject  of  baptism,  in  larger  or  smaller  quantities,  according  to  the 
original  signification  of  Rantizo,  which  is  to  pour  all  over;  to  net; 
besprinkle.     Dr.  Peters,  p.  13. 

*  Diver*  baptism*  in  the  original. 


INSTITUTION  OF  BAPTISM.  27 

"  These  passages  contain  the  only  recorded  institution 
of  Christian  baptism.*  The  Disciples,  it  is  true,  had 
before  this  baptized.  But  there  is  no  proof  that  they  had 
done  so  in  the  form  which  is  here  prescribed,  and  there  is 
no  evidence  that  the  Saviour  had  before  required  baptism 
to  be  performed  in  these  words.  In  his  last  command, 
therefore,  as  recorded  in  the  above  passages,  is  contained 
the  whole  of  our  direct  authority,  from  Christ  himself,  for 
the  administration  of  this  ordinance.  Here  Christian 
baptism  was  instituted.  This  is  our  only  divine  warrant 
to  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

"This  command,  to  baptize,  no  doubt,  has  a  definite 
meaning  —  a  meaning  which  was  understood  by  those  to 
whom  it  was  primarily  addressed,  and  which  ought  to  be 
understood  by  us.  And  yet,  it  is  expressed  in  the  fewest 
words  possible.  It  is  accompanied  with  no  commentary, 
no  explanation  of  the  words.  It  means  just  what  the 
words  meant,  then  and  there.  And  the  very  brevity  of  the 
expression,  and  the  incidental  manner  in  which  the  duty 
was  inculcated  in  the  command,  indicate  that  there  must 
have  been,  present  to  the  minds  of  the  Apostles,  circum- 
stances and  considerations  which  rendered  the  words 
perfectly  intelligible  to  them.  They,  accordingly,  received 
the  command  asking  no  exj^lanation,  and  went  forth  in 
obedience  to  it,  and  administered  baptism  to  their  disciples. 

*Pres.  Beecher  says,  pp.  206-'7,  "The  commission  was  not  omitted  by 
Luke  and  John,  that  a  commission  to  baptize  is  in  fact  a  commission  to 
purify,  that  is,  a  commission  to  remit  sins  —  and  in  Luke  and  John,  the 
Disciples  do  receive  a  commission  to  remit  sins.  Luke  xxiv,  47,  48. 
1  That  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  his  name 
among  all  nations,  and  ye  are  witnesses  of  these  things.'  In  John  the 
phraseology  is  different  from  that  of  Luke.  'Whosoever  sins  ye  remit, 
they  are  remitted  unto  them,  and  whosoever  sins  ye  retain  they  are 
retained.'  John  xx,  23.  This  may  be  affirmed  in  view  of  the  authority 
which  was  given  the  Disciples;  and  the  remission  of  sins  was  in  the 
name  of  Je?us  Christ." 


28  GENERAL  REMARKS. 

"  It  should  also  be  remarked,  that  the  administration 
of  this  ordinance,  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  being  a 
matter  of  visible  practice,  the  mode  of  it  was  of  course 
seen  and  understood  by  those  who  received  it.  It  seems 
indeed,  to  have  been  understood  alike  by  the  primitive 
Disciples.  Hence  we  hear  of  no  dispute  or  division  among 
them  concerning  it.  They  either  agreed  in  a  particular 
mode,  which  they  understood  to  be  embraced  in  the 
meaning  of  the  command,  or  they  regarded  the  spirit  of 
the  institution  as  alone  essential,  and  felt  at  liberty  to  vary 
the  mode  to  meet  circumstances  and  occasions.  Accord- 
ingly there  was  no  need  of  any  explanation,  to  them,  of 
the  mode  of  the  ordinance.  The  visible  practice  of  the 
thing,  which  they  called  baptism,  explained  itself  in  this 
respect. 

"  But  there  have  come  dark  ages  over  the  church  and 
the  world.  Scarcely  had  the  Apostles  been  laid  in  their 
graves,  when  a  fancy  began  to  prevail,  that  there  was  a 
cleansing  power  in  water  baptism.  The  strange  notion  of 
'baptismal  regeneration''  was  imbibed  by  professing 
Christians,  and  a  mode  of  baptism  was  no  doubt  adopted, 
to  imply  and  perpetuate  that  idea.  Forms  and  ceremonies 
were  soon  introduced  from  the  heathen  worship,  and 
monstrous  abuses  were  practiced,  which  continue  to  the 
present  day,  both  in  the  Romish  and  Greek  churches. 
The  spirit  of  the  institution  was  buried  and  lost  under  the 
accumulation  of  its  borrowed  accompaniments.  The 
leaders  of  the  Protestant  Reformation,  therefore,  have 
found  it  necessary  to  go  back  to  the  Bible,  to  recover  the 
original  meaning  of  this  and  other  ordinances  of  the 
Gospel. 

"  For  reasons,  however,  which  I  have  already  intimated, 
the  import  of  the  Saviour's  brief  command  on  this 
subject,  is  not  so  readily  apprehended  by  us  as  by  the 
primitive    Disciples.       The    single   word    baptizo    which 


INSTITUTION  OF  BAPTISM.  29 

defines  the  ordinance,  is  not,  with  us,  vernacular,  (i.e. 
spoken,)  and  we  are  far  removed  from  the  usages  of  those 
times  in  our  personal  experience.  We  labor,  therefore, 
under  some  disadvantages  in  our  endeavors  to  ascertain 
the  precise  truth,  as  to  the  original  mode  of  the  ordinance. 
Yet  the  institution,  in  its  primitive  purity,  is  deemed  so 
important,  that  learning  and  ignorance,  simple  piety  and 
sectarian  zeal,  have  all  been  deeply  and  perseveringly 
engaged  in  its  investigation. 

"  The  sad  result  is  a  controversy,  wide  spread  among 
evangelical  Christians,  as  to  the  mode  in  which  we  are 
required  to  fulfill  this  last  command  of  our  Saviour.  And 
what  is  still  more  sad,  principles  have  been  adopted  by 
some  parties,  which  have  divided  the  church,  and  broken 
her  visible  communion. 

"  In  such  a  state  of  things,  if  there  be  any  key  to  the 
discovery  of  the  root  of  this  evil,  and  any  principle  which 
may  promise  to  restore  the  body  of  the  faithful  to  its 
primitive  unity,  surely  every  conscientious  Christian  will 
rejoice  to  find  it.  At  least  every  one  rightly  affected  on 
this  subject,  will  see  to  it,  that  he  is  not  himself,  through 
ignorance  of  the  Saviour's  command,-  a  schismatic,  or  an 
occasion  of  division  among  the  people  of  God. 

"In  what  mode,  then,  did  the  Apostles  understand  that 
they  were  to  obey  the  command  of  Christ  to  baptize  ? 
To  answer  this  question  satisfactorily,  we  must  place  our- 
selves, as  far  a  possible,  in  their  circumstances,  and  look 
out  upon  the  truths  and  usages  which  must  have  controlled 
their  perception  of  the  meaning  of  the  words  and  things 
embraced  in  this  command."  Dr.  Peters,  pp.  13-19. 

"  On  this  subject,"  says  Pres.  Beecher,  p.  117,  "two 
opposing  systems  are  in  conflict.  One  based  on  the  per- 
formance of  a  special  act,  i.  e.  immersion — the  other,  on 
indicating  an  effect,  i.  e.  purification.  Each  of  these 
systems  tends  to  results  peculiar  to  itself.     By  these  results 


.30  GENERAL  REMARKS. 

the  true  nature  of  each  system  will  be  evolved,  and  in 
consequence  of  them,  its  soundness  will  be  tested.  Such 
is  God's  method  of  bringing  false  systems  to  a  close." 

§  2.  Present  Position  of  the  Baptists — State  of  the 
Controversy. 

"The  system  based  on  the  performance  of  a  specific  act 
is  evolved.  Let  us  look  at  its  results,  as  seen  in  the  pre- 
sent position  of  its  advocates. 

"  The  denomination  of  evangelical  Baptists  is  large, 
universally  diffused,  and  very  active.  It  is,  in  all  the 
movements  of  the  church,  a  constantly  operating  force. 
Of  course  the  position  they  assume,  as  it  regards  other 
denominations,  is  a  matter  of  no  small  consequence. 
They  have  it  in  their  power  universally  to  affect  the  tran- 
quillity of  Zion.  We  shall,  therefore,  briefly  consider  the 
position  which  they  do  in  fact  assume.  This  can  be  easily 
inferred  by  carrying  out  logically  the  following  principles 
—  that  baptism  is  essential  to  church  membership,  and 
that  the  command  to  baptize  is  a  command  to  immerse. 
From  these  principles,  they  infer  : 

1.  That  all  other  denominations  are  unbaptized,  because 
unimmersed,  and  that  they  are,  therefore,  in  a  state  of 
disobedience  to  God. 

2.  That  other  denominations  cannot  be  recognized  and 
treated  by  them  as  members  of  the  church  of  Christ, 
because  unbaptized,  and  are  therefore  to  be  excluded  on 
this  ground,  from  communion  with  them  at  the  table  of 
the  Lord. 

3.  That  other  denominations  are  guilty  of  mistranslating 
the  Word  of  God,  or  of  at  least  covering  up  its  sense  on 
the  subject  of  baptism. 

4.  That  to  the  Baptist  denomination  is  assigned  the 
great  work  of  giving  correct  translations  of  the  Bible  to 
the  world,  and  of  restoring  the  Gospel  to  its  primitive 
purity  and  simplicity. 


PRESENT  POSITION  OF  THE  BAPTISTS.  31 

"'These  positions  are  not  with  them  mere  points  of 
theory,  but  have  been,  of  late,  with  increasing  vigor  and 
decision,  reduced  to  j)ractice.  They  have  also  assumed  a 
tone  of  uncommon  decision  and  boldness  in  announcing 
their  principles,  as  if  their  correctness  were  beyond  all 
question.  Nay,  too  often  have  many  of  them  spoken 
with  contempt  and  ridicule,  not  to  say  insolence,  of  those 
who  hold  the  opposite  opinion,  as  if  they  were  holding 
on  to  exploded  errors,  in  the  face  of  all  the  learning  of 
the  modern  world,  and  .even  against  their  own  better 
knowledge. 

"  Prof.  Eaton,  of  Hamilton  Baptist  Institute,  in  his 
speech  before  the  Baptist  Bible  Society,  at  their  anniver- 
sary of  1840,  says,  Report  p.  74,  'the  translation'  of  the 
Baptist  Missionaries,  'is  so  undeniably  correct,'  that  its 
uncorrectness  could  not  be  pretended,  without  committing 
the  objector's  character  for  scholarship  and  candor. 
'Who  are  they,'  sir,  said  he,  '  who  cavil  about  the  plain 
meaning  of  the  original  word  "whose  translation  is  so 
offensive  ?  Are  they  the  Persons,  and  the  Campbell1--.,  and 
the  Greenfields,  and  such  like  ?  No  sir.  But  the  cavilers 
are  men  who,  whatever  may  be  their  standing  in  other 
respects,  have  no  reputation  as  linguists  and  philologists 
to  lose.  There  really  can  be  no  rational  doubt  in  the 
mind  of  any  sound  and  candid  Greek  scholar,  about  the 
evident  meaning  of  the  word  in  question.  I  venture  to 
•say,  at  the  risk  of  the  little  reputation  for  Greek  scholar- 
ship which  I  possess,  that  there  are  no  words  of  plainer 
Import  in  the  Bible.  The  profane  tampering  which  has 
been  applied  to  these  words,'"'  <&c.  &c.  See  Hall's  Bapiizi 
Errors,  p.  39. 

"Mr.  Hinton,  after  an  argument  on  the  import  of  the 
word  baptizo,  and  professed  history  of  the  erigin  and 
progress  of  pouring  and  sprinkling,  says,  pp.  196-'7,  may 
,r  respectfully  ask  the  Pedo-Baptist  who  reads  this  volume. 


32  GENERAL    REMARK 8. 

(Episcopalian,  Presbyterian,  Congregationalist,  or  Metho- 
dist,) 1.  Whether  he  has  not  been  kept  in  ignorance  of 
these  facts  ?  2.  Whether  those  clergy  who  withhold  these 
facts  from  their  flocks,  do  not  take  upon  themselves  an 
undue  and  dangerous  responsibility  ?  3.  Whether  he  will 
have  independence  enough  to  take  every  adequate  means 
to  ascertain  if  these  statements  can  be  denied  ?  And 
finally,  if  they  cannot  be  gainsayed,  whether  he  will  dare 
to  remain  unbaptized,  and  therefore  in  a  state  of  disobe- 
dience to  the  King  of  kings  ?  " 

"  On  the  28th  of  April,  1840,  the  Baptist  American 
and  Foreign  Bible  Society,  passed  the  following  resolution: 
Resolved,  that  by  the  fact  that  the  nations  of  the  earth 
must  now  look  to  the  Baptist  denomination  aloxe  for 
faithful  translations  of  the  Word  of  God,  a  responsibility 
is  imposed  upon  them,  demanding  its  full  discharge,  an 
unwonted  degree  x>f  union,  of  devotion,  and  of  strenuous, 
persevering  effort  throughout  the  entire  body."  Moved 
by  Prof.  Eaton,  seconded  by  Bev.  H.  Malcom. 

"  In  their  report,  this  society  stigmatize  the  translation 
of  all  other  denominations,  as  '  versons  in  which  the  real 
meaning  of  words  *  *  *  is  furposely  kept  out 
of  sight,  so  that  Baptists  cannot  circulate  faithful  ver- 
sions *  *  *  unless  they  print  them  at  their  own 
expense.'  They  assert,  p.  4,  *  It  is  known  that  the 
British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society,  and  the  American 
Bible  Society,  have  virtually  combined  to  obscure,  at  least, 
a  part  of  the  divine  revelation,  and  that  these  societies 
continue  to  circulate  versions  of  the  Bible  unfaithful,  at 
least  so  far  as  the  subject  of  baptism  is  concerned.'  " 
Hall  on  Baptism,  27,  28. 

Again  Prof.  Eaton  says,  Report,  p.  7-9,  "  Never,  sir,  was 
there  a  chord  struck,  that  vibrated  simultaneously  through 
so  many  Baptist  hearts  from  one  extremity  of  the  land  to 
the  other,  as  when  it  was  announced  that  the  heathen  world 


THE  OPPOSITE  SYSTEM.  33 

must  look  to  them  alone  for  an  unveiled  view  of  the  glories 
of  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

"A  deep  conviction  seized  the  minds  of  almost  the 
whole  body,  that  they  were  divinely  and  peculiarly  set  for 
the  defense  and  the  dissemination  of  the  Gospel  as  delivered 
to  man  by  its  heavenly  author.  A  new  zeal  in  their 
master's  cause,  and  unwonted  kindlings  of  fraternal  love 
glowed  in  their  hearts ;  and  an  attracting  and  concentrat- 
ing movement,  reaching  to  the  utmost  extremity  of  the 
mass,  began  and  has  been  going  on  and  increasing  in 
power  ever  since."  Hall's  Baptist  Errors,  p.  38.  Pres, 
Beecher,  pp.  117-120. 

Many  more  facts  of  a  similar  kind  might  be  adduced, 
were  it  necessary  ;  but,  these  will  suffice  to  give  the  reader 
something  like  a  correct  idea  of  the  arrogant  claims  of 
the  Ba'ptists  generally,  and  of  that  spirit  of  exclusion  and 
proscription  peculiar  to  Immersionists.*  On  this  ground, 
that  union  which  is  so  desirable  among  the  different 
branches  of  Christ's  church ;  and  that  community  of 
interests  and  of  paternal  feelings,  among  the  members  of 
his  mj^stical  body,  which  is  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  are 
altogether  out  of  the  question. 

''Indeed  their  whole  body  has  been  rallied  by  a  univer- 
sal impulse,  as  if  on  the  eve  of  a  general  victory,  and  as 
if  their  triumph  was  destined  to  usher  in  the  glories  of 
the  millenial  day."      Beecher,  p.  120. 

§  3.  Inferences  from  the  Opposite  System. 

"  The  logical  consequences  of  the  other  system  remain 
to  be  stated.  These  can  easily  be  inferred  from  its  funda- 
mental position,  THAT  THERE  IS  NO  COMMAND  TO  DIP  OR 
IMMERSE  IN  THE  NEW    TESTAMENT,   BUT  SOLELY  A  COMMAND 

to  purify  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity  ;  and  that  each 

*  By  the  word  Baptist  I  include  the  whole  family  of  Immersionists ; 
and  a  portion  of  them  are  at  this  very  time,  (1855,)  preparing  a  new 
version  of  the  English  Bible. 


34  GENERAL  REMARKS. 

denomination  may  select  for  itself  what  it  deems  the  most 
decorous  and  appropriate  mode  of  fulfilling  the  command. 
This,  if  kindly  received,  is  a  conciliating  view,  and  tends 
to  unity  ;  for  it  gives  Christian  liberty  to  all.  So  I  pre- 
sented it,  and  I  hope  for  a  kind  and  candid  reception.  My 
hopes  have  been  disappointed.  Efforts  have  been  made 
to  suppress  it,  by  affected  contempt  of  the  view,  and  its 
advocate.  Or  it  has  been  rejected  with  scorn,  attended  by 
uncalled  for  personal  attacks  upon  the  intellectual  and 
religious  character  of  its  advocate.  This  I  deeply  regret, 
for  I  wrote  with  feelings  of  great  kindness  toward  the 
Baptist  denomination,  and  strong  desires  for  unity  in  the 
love  of  Christ.  But,  perhaps,  I  ought  not  to  be  surprised. 
If  the  view  I  advocate  is  correct,  close  communion  must 
die,  and  all  the  charges  of  Baptists  against  other  denomi- 
nations must  be  retracted,  and  their  course  as  to  the  trans- 
lation of  the  Bible,  and  the  Bible  Society,  retraced.  At 
all  events,  union  and  conciliation  they  reject ;  they  still 
continue  their  attack.*     Hence  logic  must  have  its  course. 

"  Of  this  system,  the  logical  consequences  are  clear, 
and  no  Christian  charity  calls  for  their  suppression.  I 
announce  them  soberly,  calmly,  and  yet  decidedly,  and  as 
in  the  presence  of  a  holy  God, 

1.  That  other  denominations  are  not  unbaptized,  though 
unimmersed,  because  they  are  purified. 

2„  They  are  not  substituting  human  form  in  the  place 
of  a  commandment  of  God — nor  are  they  in  rebellion 
against  God. 

3.  There  is  no  good  reason  to  exclude  them  from  the 
table  of  the  Lord  ;  nor 

*  Readers  generally  are  not  apprized  of  the  fact,  that  when  Pres. 
Beecher  published  the  first  part  of  his  valuable  -work  on  Baptism,  it 
drew  down  the  displeasure  of  Baptists  generally,  and  called  forth  a  sharp 
repl}'  from  their  great  champion — the  late  Dr.  Carson,  of  England,  which 
drew  from  the  President  a  reply  in  turn,  and  caused  him  to  produce  a 
thorough  investigation  of  the  subject.  This  accounts  for  the  language 
used  aboveu 


ORIGIN    OF    IMMERSION. 


35 


4.  Are  they  guilty  of  mistranslating  nor  obscuring  the 
Word  of  God. 

5.  The  Baptists  mistranslate  the  Word  of  God — not 
only  concealing  its  meaning,  but  putting  in  place  of  it, 
one  entirely  foreign  to  the  mind  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

6.  They  are  not  divinely  set  apart  to  the  great  work  of 
giving  correct  translations  of  the  Bible  to  the  heathen 
world  ;  on  the  other  hand,  they  are  the  only  denomination 
who  are  combined  systematically,  to  mistranslate  it,  and 
to  hide  its  meaning  from  the  world. 

7.  They  are  guilty  of  teaching  for  doctrines,  the  com- 
mandments of  men,  and  because  these  will  not  comply 
with  uncommanded  external  forms,  of  charging  them  with 
rebellion  against  God,  and  of  excluding  them  from  the 
table  of  the  Lord.     And 

8.  For  the  sake  of  this  same  uncommanded  form,  they 
have  divided  the  Bible  Society,  and  do  still  divide  and 
agitate  the  Church  of  God. 

"  If  the  position  on  which  this  -system  rests  is  true,  it 
needs  no  labored  argument  to  show  that  these  things  are 
so.  They  are  but  its  logical  and  necessary  consequence. 
As  such,  I  announce  them. 

"In  one  point,  however,  this  system  does  not  reverse 
the  position  of  -our  Baptist  brethren.  It  does  not  pro- 
nounce them  unbaptized,  nor  exclude  them  from  the  table 
of  the  Lord.  It  admits  that  immersion  is  baptism,  not 
indeed,  because  it  is  immersion,  but  solely  because  it  is  one 
mode  of  purification."     Prcs.  Beecher,  pj).  121,  122. 

§  4.  Causes  which  led  to  the  early  practice  of 
Immersion,  and  to  the  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Re- 
generation. 

Upon  this  subject,  Dr.  Peters  inquires,  "  How,  then, 
it  may  be  asked,  did  the  practice  of  baptism  by  immer- 
sion come  into  use  among  the  early  Christian  churches  ? 
For  there  is  evidence  sufficient  to  show  that  as  early  as 


36  GENERAL    REMARKS. 

the  second  century  immersion  was  generally  practiced, 
though  it  was  not  then  claimed  by  any  as  the  exclusive 
mode.  Sprinkling  never  ceased  to  be  held  as  valid  bap- 
tism, in  cases  when,  on  account  of  sickness,  or  other 
causes,  immersion  was  inconvenient  or  dangerous.  And 
immersion,  though  practiced  in  the  early  ages,  was  never 
made  an  indispensable  condition  of  communion  by  any 
sect  until  the  rise  of  the  Anabaptists  in  the  sixteenth 
century. 

"  On  the  subject,"  continued  he,  "  I  remark,  that  it  is 
impossible  to  trace  all  the  steps  of  the  rapid  changes 
which  so  soon  resulted  in  the  ruinous  corruption  of  the 
Romish  Church.  Even  in  the  Apostles'  days,  there 
sprang  up  crude  opinions  and  extravagant  practices  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Church.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  so  per- 
verted by  the  church  in  Corinth,  that  the  Apostle  sharply 
rebukes  them  (1  Cor.  xi)  for  their  surfeiting  and  drunk- 
enness. And  so  prone  were  they  to  abuse  the  institutions 
of  the  gospel,  that  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  same  Epistle, 
Paul  gives  utterance  to  this  strange  declaration :  'I  thank 
God  that  I  baptized  none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gains, 
lest  any  should  say,  that  I  baptized  in  my  own  name.' 

"But  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  we  find  the 
state  of  things  far  more  deplorable.  Not  only  had  the 
simple  scriptural  mode  of  baptism  become  changed,  but 
monstrous  abuses  of  it  were  introduced,  as  exorcism, 
unction,  the  giving  of  salt  and  milk  to  the  candidate, 
clothing  him  in  a  snow-white  robe,  and  crowning  him 
with  evergreen.  It  was  in  those  ages  that  the  imagina- 
tion became  prevalent,  that  there  was  a  saving  virtue  in 
the  water  of  baptism.  It  was  therefore  concluded  that 
the  more  water  the  better,  and  that  it  should  be  applied 
to  the  whole  body  that  the  regeneration  might  be  complete." 

Upon  the  same  subject,  says  Pres.  Beecher :  "  On 
making  the  inquiry,  it  appears  manifest  to  me,  that  the 


ORIGIN    OF    IMMERSION.  37 

practice  in  question  did  not  originate  in  a  belief  that  the 
word  baptizo  means  immerse,  but  in  entirely  different  and 
independent  causes.  Suppose  now  the  word  to  mean  to 
purify,  it  is  neither  impossible  nor  improbable  that  certain 
local  and  peculiar  causes  may  have  led  to  some  one  mode 
of  purifying  rather  than  another,  and  that  this  mode 
may  have  been  immersion  ;  and  if  all  these  things  may 
have  been  so,  who  has  a  right  to  assume,  without  proof, 
that  they  were  not  so  ?  I  believe  that  they  were.  If  it 
is  inquired,  What  causes  they  were  ?  I  answer,  1.  Ori- 
ental usages  and  the  habits  of  warm  regions.  2.  A  false 
interpretation  of  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12.  And  3. 
A  very  early  habit  of  ascribing  peculiar  virtue  to  external 
forms.  The  first  cause  is  sufficient  to  begin  the  practice  ; 
the  other  two  to  extend,  perpetuate,  and  confirm  it.  Now 
if  it  can  be  shown  that  these  causes  did  exist,  and  did 
operate,  and  had  great  power,  then  a  sufficient  account 
of  the  origin  and  progress  of  the  usage  may  be  given  by 
these  alone.  .  .  .  But  of  their  existence  or  their 
power,  can  there  be  any  doubt  ?  Did  not  Christianity 
begin  in  the  warmer  region  of  the  East,  and  in  the  midst 
of  a  people  whose  climate,  habits,  costume,  and  mode  of 
life,  were  all  adapted  to  bathing  ?  and  was  not  the  prac- 
tice nearly  universal  ?  Hence  nothing  could  be  more 
natural  than  its  use  on  convenient  occasions  as  a  mode  of 
religious  purifying ;  and  if,  as  some  maintain,  the  form 
(immersion)  had  been  previously  used  as  a  religious  rite, 
nothing  could  be  more  natural  than  its  adoption  as  a  mode 
of  purifying  in  the  Church. 

"  As  to  the  interpretation  of  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Gol. 
ii,  12,  as  referring  to  the  external  form,  all  may  not  be 
ready  to  concede  that  it  was  false  ;  yet  that  it  was  early 
prevalent  and  powerful,  no  one,  I  think,  at  all  acquainted 
with  the  facts  of  the  case,  will  deny.  As  I  have  before 
stated,  our  Baptist  brethren  regard  these  passages  as  an 


38 


GENERAL    REMARKS. 


inspired  exposition  of  the  mode  of  baptism — as  proving 
irresistibly  that  the  right  is  designed,  not  merely  to 
represent  purification  from  sin,  but  purification  in  a  way 
significant  of  the  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  Christ, 
and  of  the  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  the  believer 
with  him  ;  and  although  this  signification  of  the  rite  was 
not  seen  by  men  when  it  was  first  established,  yet  it  was 
fully  before  the  mind  of  God,  and  was  finally  and  fully 
disclosed  by  the  Apostle  Paul.  .  .  .  Xor  are  they 
without  authority  for  interpreting  these  texts  as  referring 
to  the  mode  of  the  external  rite.  Indeed  the  opinions  of 
the  Fathers,  whatever  they  may  be  worth,  so  far  as  I  have 
examined,  are  entirely  with  them.  This  explanation 
seems  to  have  been  adopted  at  a  very  early  period.  But 
it  was  most  fully  developed  by  Chrysostom  ;  and  un- 
doubtedly his  authority  and  eloquence,  more  than  those 
of  any  other  man,  tended  to  give  it  currency  in  the  East, 
whilst  the  influence  of  Augustine  was  equally  decisive  in 
the  West. 

"  As  to  a  superstitious  attachment  to  forms,  who  can 
deny  it  ?  nay,  who  that  is  a  Protestant  does  ?  Evidence 
of  it  appears  on  every  page,  that  records  the  early  history 
of  the  Church.  To  omit  all  else,  the  history  of  this  rite 
alone  would  furnish  volumes  of  proof.  Let  the  holy 
water  —  the  baptismal  chrism,  to  symbolize  and  bestow 
the  Holy  Spirit  —  the  putting  on  of  white  robes  after 
baptism,  to  symbolize  the  putting  on  of  Christ  —  the 
baptism  of  men  and  women  perfectly  naked,  to  denote 
their  entire  nakedness  before  putting  on  Christ  —  let  the 
anointing  of  the  eyes  and  the  ears,  to  denote  the  sancti- 
fication  of  the  senses  —  let  the  eating  of  honey  and  milk, 
the  signs  of  the  cross ;  and  finally,  let  the  baptismal 
regeneration  —  the  sum  and  completion  of  all  these  formal 
tendencies  —  bear  witness  to  the  mournful  truth.  Now 
when  the  tendencies  to  formalism  and  superstition  were 


ORIGIN    OF    IMMJERSieN.  39 

60  all-pervading  and  almost  omnipotent,  what  could  avert 
a  blind  and  superstitious  devotion  to  an  early  form  — 
one  especially  in  which  so  much  was  supposed  to  be 
involved,  both  of  emblematical  import  and  of  sanctifying 
power." — Pres.  Beecher,  pp.  59,  60,  and  84. 

In  addition  to  the  above,  the  habits  of  the  Eastern 
nations  generally,  and  particularly  in  the  warmer  portions, 
consisted,  to  a  great  extent,  in  bathing  and  washing,  with 
a  view  to  cleanliness  and  health, —  to  leave  religion  out  of 
view  ;  next,  the  Jewish  ceremonial,  with  a  number  of 
traditions, —  imposed  by  authority  and  honored  by  time — 
consisting,  as  it  did,  of  a  variety  of  washings  and  purifi- 
cations, mostly  by  water  —  the  particular  mode  of  appli- 
cation not  being  prescribed,  left  it,  as  to  modes,  optionary 
with  the  worshiper  ;  all  doubtless  exerted  an  influence  in 
preparing  the  way  for  the  practice  or  usage  in  question. 
Moreover,  the  distinction  between  material  and  spiritual 
baptism  was  soon  left  out  of  view,  and  by  an  easy  process, 
a  mind  naturally  addicted  to  superstition,  the  thing  sig- 
nified—  internal  purification  —  was  attached  to  the  em- 
blem itself ;  and  the  inevitable  consequence  was,  a  host 
of  errors  of  a  vital  nature  ensued.  And  finally,  the  true 
import  of  several  Scripture  passages,  being  at  the  same 
time  immersed  in  the  flood  of  inundating  errors,  lent  their 
influence  in  settling  the  matter,  and  giving  it  the  sanction 
of  inspiration  itself.  Such  as  "  the  washing  of  regenera- 
tion," "born  of  the  water,"  and  "having  your  bodies 
washed  with  pure  water ;  "  and  especially  Rom.  vi,  3,  4, 
and  Col.  ii,  12,  which  were  taken  in  the  external  as  we 
have  seen.  And  to  crown  the  whole,  the  superstitious 
notion,  that  some  saving  virtue  was  imparted  to  the  water 
at  the  baptism  of  Christ,  which  they  of  course  fancied 
was  by  immersion  ;  and  this  completes  the  picture,  and 
immerses  the  Church  with  an  immersion,  from  which  it 
will  doubtless  require  ages  for  her  to  emerge. 


40  general  remarks. 

§5.  Statement  of  the  Case,  and  Principles  of  Inves- 
tigation. 

"  The  case  is  this  :  Christ  has  enjoined  the  performance 
of  a  duty  in  the  command  to  baptize. 

"  What  is  the  duty  enjoined  ?  or,  in  other  words, 
what  does  the  word  baptize,  in  which  the  command  is 
given,  mean  ?     One  of  two  things  must  be  true  : 

1.  "  Either  it  is,  as  to  mode,  generic,  denoting  merely 
the  production  of  an  effect  (as  purity,)  so  that  the  com- 
mand may  be  fulfilled  in  many  ways  ;  or,  it  is  so  specific, 
denoting  a  definite  mode,  that  it  can  be  fulfilled  in  but 
one  way.  To  illustrate  by  an  analogous  case  :  Christ 
said,  '  Go  teach  all  nations.'  Here  the  word  go,  is  so 
generic  as  to  include  all  modes  of  going  which  any  one 
may  choose  to  adopt.  If  a  man  walks,  or  runs,  or  rides, 
or  sails,  he  equally  fulfills  the  command.  On  the  other 
hand,  some  king  or  ruler,  for  particular  reasons,  might 
command  motion  by  a  word  entirely  specific  ;  as  for 
example,  that  certain  mourners  should  walk  in  a  funeral 
procession.  Now,  it  is  plain  that  such  a  command  could 
not  be  fulfilled  by  riding  or  by  running,  for  though  these 
are  modes  of  going,  they  are  not  modes  of  walking,  and 
the  command  is  not  to  go  in  general,  but  specifically  to 
walk.  So  when  a  general  says  march,  it  will  not  answer 
for  soldiers  to  run  ;  for  though  this  is  a  mode  of  going, 
it  is  not  a  mode  of  marching. 

"  So  likewise,  when  Christ  said  baptize,  he  either  used  a 
word  which  had  a  generic  sense,  denoting  the  production 
of  an  effect  in  any  mode,  such  as  purify,  cleanse  ;  or  a 
specific  sense,  denoting  a  particular  mode,  such  as  immerse, 
sprinkle,  pour. 

2.  "  Which  ever  way  we  decide,  as  regards  the  import 
of  the  word,  we  ought  to  be  uniform  in  its  use,  as  applied 
to  the  rite  of  baptism.     For  though  the  same  word  may 


STATEMENT    OF    THE    CASE.  4i 

Lave  divers  meanings  when  applied  to  different  things, 
and  in  various  circumstances,  yet  it  certainly  cannot  when 
applied  to  the  same  thing,  and  in  the  same  circumstances , 

Hence,  if  we  adopt  the  generic  meaning,  purify  of 
cleanse,  we  must  adhere  to  it  at  all  times,  when  speaking 
of  the  rite.  On  the  other  hand,  if  we  adopt  a  specific 
meaning,  as  immerse  or  sprinkle,  we  must  adhere  to  it  in 
the  same  way,  and  not  pass  from  the  generic  to  the 
specific,  or  from  the  specific  to  the  generic,  according  to 
exigencies,  on  the  ground  that  the  word  baptizo,  may,  in 
the  whole  circuit  of  its  use,  mean  sometimes  one  thing 
and  sometimes  another,  Nor  must  we  adopt  both,  for 
however  numerous  the  possible  meanings  of  a  word  may 
be  in  its  various  usages,  it  has  in  each  particular  case  but 
one  meaning,  and  in  all  similar  cases,  its  meaning  is  the 
same.  Hence  the  word  baptizo,  as  applied  to  a  given 
rite,  has  not  two  or  many  meanings,  but  one,  and  to  that 
one  we  should  in  all  cases  adhere. 

"  If  we  adopt  a  generic  meaning,  denoting  the  produce 
tion  of  an  effect,  we  are  not  limited  by  the  command  to 
any  specific  mode  of  fulfilling  it,  and  are  at  liberty  to  vary 
the  mode  according  to  circumstances.  But  if  we  adopt  a 
specific  meaning,  denoting  merely  a  mode,  we  are  limited 
by  the  very  import  of  the  command  to  the  range  of  that 
meaning. 

'*  Hence  if  the  command  is  to  purify  or  cleanse,  we  are 
not  limited  by  the  command  to  any  one  mode,  but  may 
choose  that  which  seems  to  us  most  appropriate,  whether 
it  be  sprinkling,  pouring,  or  immersion. 

"But  if  the  command  is  specific  and  modal,  as  im* 
merse,  then  we  are  limited  by  the  range  of  that  word, 
and  cannot  fulfill  the  command  by  sprinkling  or  pouring, 
for  these  are  not  modes  of  immersion  any  more  than 
riding  is  a  mode  of  walking,  or  writing  a  mode  of  painting, 

"It  is  true  that  sprinkling  or  pouring  may  be  modes 
4 


42  GENERAL   ftttMARtt&j 

Of  purifying,— *and  so  is  riding  a  mode  of  goirg.  But  if 
the  command  is  not  purify,  but  immerse,  then  all  debate 
as  to  mode  is  at  an  end  ;  for  you  can  immerse,  not  by 
sprinkling,  but  only  by  immersion."  —  Pres.  Beecher, 
puges  3,  4. 

§6.  Causes  of  the  Disregard  of  these  Principles,  and 
the  Consequences. 

"Though  the  principles  stated  are  simple  and  obvious^ 
yet  the  natural  operations  of  the  mind  on  questions  of 
philosophy,  have  been  in  this  case  embarrassed  and  per- 
plexed by  certain  influences  of  a  kind  peculiar  to  the  word* 

"  At  the  time  of  the  translation  of  the  Bible,  a  contro- 
versy had  arisen  as  regards  the  import  of  the  word,  so 
that,  although  it  was  conceded  to  have  an  import  in  the. 
original,  yet  it  was  impossible  to  assign  to  it  in  English 
any  meaning  without  seeming  to  take  sides  in  the  contro- 
versy then  pending. 

"Accordingly,  in  order  to  take  neither  side,  they  did 
not  attempt  to  give  the  sense  of  the  term  in  a  significant 
English,  word,  but  merely  transferred  the  word  baptizo, 
with  a  slight  alteration  of  termination  to  our  language ■. 
The  consequence  was  that  it  did  not  exhibit  its  original 
significancy,  except  what  was  derived  from  its  application 
to  designate  an  external  visible  rite.  In  short,  it  became 
merely  the  name  of  a  rite,  and  had  a  usage  strictly  techni- 
cal,* and  lost  to  the  ear  whatever  significance  it  oriffinally 
had, 

"The  habit  of  using  the  word  in  a  technical  sense,  has 

*  This  effect  Upon  the  mind  is  owing  to  the  power  of  association  of 
ideas.  For  instance  :  The  mind  of  one  who  helieves  in,  and  is  accus- 
tomed to  the  practice  of  immersion  alone,  whenever  the  word  baptism 
occurs,  involuntarily  reverts  to  the  mode  immersion,  and  forgets  that 
the  term  means  anything  else.  So,  on  the  other  hand,  a  person  accui- 
to'rned  to  the  practice  of  sprinkling  alone,  loses  all  idea  of  baptism 
meaning  anything  but  sprinkling. 


(  aUS'ES   of  the  disregard.  43 

tended  to  unfit  the  mind  for  the  discussion  of  the  question 
as  to  the  mode  of  baptism  in  various  ways,  of  which  I 
shall  mention  three. 

1.  "It  has  led  to  a  departure  from  the  principles  already 
stated,  that  words  when  applied  to  the  same  subject,  and 
in  the  same  circumstances,  cannot  have  a  double  sense. 
This  rule,  as  has  been  remarked,  does  not  forbid  that  the 
same  word  in  different  circumstances  should  have  various 
senses  ;  accordingly,  it  may  be  conceded  that  the  word 
baptizo  has  various  senses  in  the  wide  range  of  its  usage, 
in  scriptural  and  classical  Greek :  but  out  of  this  variety 
of  usages,  there  is  one  strictly  of  a  religious  nature,  and 
having  a  direct  reference  to  one  of  the  great  revealed  facts 
-of  Christianity.  Now  in  a  case  like  this,  the  laws  of 
philology  require  that  some  one  of  the  meanings  of  the 
word  should  be  fixed  on,  and  assigned  to  it  in  all  cases. 
But  the  habit  of  using  the  word  baptize  in  a  strictly 
technical  sense,  as  the  name  of  a  rite,  has  led  to  a  disre- 
gard  of  this  simple  and  t)bvious  rule. 

"  Many  writers,  fixing  their  minds  merely  upon  the 
idea  of  a  rite,  and  finding  that  the  word  baptizo  means 
sometimes  to  wash,  sometimes  to  immerse,  and  sometimes, 
as  they  think,  to  pour  or  sprinkle,  conclude  that  the  rite 
of  baptism  may  be  performed  in  either  way  ;  entirely  for- 
getting that,  although  the  word  should  happen,  in  the 
wide  range  of  its  usage,  scriptural  and  classical,  secular 
and  religious,  to  have  all  these  meanings,  it  by  no  means 
fellows,  that  when  used  as  a  religious  term,  and  in  certain 
circumstances,  it  means  immerse :  it  does  not  also  in 
similar  circumstances  mean  to  wet  or  to  wash,  to  sprinkle 
or  to  pour,  to  color  or  to  dye,  but  simply  to  immerse. 
And  just  as  plainly,  if  in  some  cases  of  its  religious  uses, 
it  means  to  purify,  it  does  not  in  others  of  the  same  kind 
mean  to  pour,  to  sprinkle,  or  to  immerse. 

2.  "  The  other  mode  in  which  the  technical  «se  of  this 


44  CxEneral  remarks, 

word  has  unfitted  the  mind  for  a  fair  consideration  of  the 
question  is,  it  has  permitted  the  introduction  of  a  discus- 
sion as  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  after  concessions  have 
been  made,  which  ought  forever  to  exclude  it.  For 
example :  The  question  arises,  what  meaning  did  the" 
Word  baptize  convey  to  those,  who  in  the  age  of  the  New 
Testament  writers  read  the  command,  "Go  baptize  all 
nations?  "  Was  it  to  immerse?  So  our  brethren,  the 
Baptists  maintain  ;  and  so  many  who  do  not  immerse, 
concede.  Now  after  such  a  concession,  with  what  pro- 
priety they  can  debate  any  longer  as  to  the  mode,  I 
acknowledge  that  I  cannot  perceive.  Nor  do  I  think  that 
they  would  do  it  were  it  not  for  an  illusion  practiced  by 
the  technical  word,  baptize,  upon  their  minds. 

"After  admitting  as  a  point  of  philology,  that  the 
word  baptizo  in  its  religious  use  means  immerse,  the 
mind  seems  to  revert  to  the  eld  habit  of  using  the  Angli- 
cised word  baptism,  without  attaching  to  it  any  meaningr 
and  we  are  at  once  told  that  it  is  of  no  use  to  dispute  as 
to  the  mode  of  baptism.  Suppose  now,  instead  of  the 
word  baptism,  we  substitute  the  meaning  which  it  has 
been  conceded  to  have,  immerse,  and  the  illusion  is  at 
once  exposed.  We  cencede  that  baptize  means  immerse, 
but  of  what  use  is  it  to  dispute  concerning  the  mode  of 
immersion  ?  Of  none,  surely,  so  you  de  but  immerse, 
But  can  you  immerse  by  sprinkling  ?  Is  sprinkling  .a 
mode  of  immersion  ?  The  fact  is,  that  if  the  word  denotes 
a  given  definite  act,  no  other  dissimilar  act  is,  or  can  be, 
a  mode  of  it.  Pouring  is  not  a  mode  ef  sprinkling  or  of 
immersion,  nor  is  sprinkling  a  mode  of  pouring  or  of 
immersion,  nor  is  immersion  a  mode  of  sprinkling  or 
of  pouring. 

3.  "  Others  again,  still  using  the  word  as  a  technic, 
say  that  baptism  is  the  application  of  water  in  any  way, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 


CAUSES     OF    THE    DISREGARD,  4tf 

Holy  Ghost  ;  but  base  their  conclusions  rather  on  reason 
and  the  nature  of  the  case,  or  on  the  design  of  the  rite, 
than  on  a  thorough  philological  investigation  of  the  word. 
Now  the  defect  of  this  last  mode  of  reasoning  is,  that  it 
does  not  interpret  the  command.  It  uses  the  word  like 
a  technic,  having  no  meaning  of  its  own  ;  and  gives  rather 
a  description  of  a  rite  than  a  definition  of  baptizo. 

"  No  one  ever  pretended  to  define  baptizo  as  meaning 
'  to  apply  water  in  any  way/  Of  course,  baptism  cannot 
be  defined  to  be  the  '  application  of  water  in  any  way/ 
And  whether  this  view  of  the  rite  is  correct  or  not,  must 
depend  entirely  on  the  meaning  of  the  word,"  —  Pres, 
Beecher,  pp.  5,  7, 


THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Import  of  the  Word  Baptizo  — »  The  Philological* 
Definition. 

I  design  to  devote  this  chapter  and  the  next  to  the 
investigation  of  the  meaning  of  the  word  baptizo  or 
baptize,  as  it  appears  in  our  Scriptures  ;  and  endeavor,  as 
far  as  possible,  to  divest  it  of  that  mysticism  and  embar- 
rassment with  which  it  is  encumbered  in  a  great  many- 
works  upon  the  subject  of  baptism.  I  shall  in  this 
chapter  present  the  subject  to  the  reader  upon  principles 
strictly  philological,  by  a  brief,  but  thorough  examination 
of  the  original  term  baptizo,  according  to  the  Greek  of 
the  New  Testament ;  and  in  the  next  chapter,  to  discuss 
the  same  subject  upon  evidence  derived  from  the  New 
Testament  and  other  writings  of  that  age  alone,  and 
ascertain  the  true  import  of  the  word  baptize  ;  also  from 
that  source  the  scripture  idea  of  baptism.  And  thus 
arrive  at  the  same  conclusion  or  result,  through  different 
and  independent  channels  of  information  ;  which  will  of 
course  be  doubly  satisfactory  to  the  anxious  inquirer  after 
truth.  And  here  I  will  claim  a  calm  and  patient  hearing 
from  our  Baptist  brethren,  for  it  is  not  my  object  to 
wound  the  feelings  of  those  who  differ  with  me,  but  if 
possible,  to  conduct  them  to  the  truth  upon  the  subject  of 
baptism. 

Says  Dr.  Peters,  (pp.  20-24)  :  "  Our  Baptist  brethren 


ipftlLOLO'GICAL    DEFlMTi'OS*.  41 

maintain  strenuously  that  the  primary  classical  meaning 
of  the  word  baptizo,  is  to  immerse,  or  dip,  and  that  the 
meaning  of  the  word  and  its  derivatives,  used  to  designate 
the  ordinance  of  baptism,  must  control  the  mode  of  its 
administration.  On  this  ground  principally  they  contend 
that  immersion,  and  nothing  else,  is  baptism*  I  say  on 
this  ground  principally,  because,  though  many  other 
topics  of  argument  are  put  forth  in  their  writings,  I  think 
it  will  be  made  apparent,  in  the  course  of  our  discussion, 
that  they  are  of  little  weight  in  comparison  with  this- 
This  is  regarded  as  the  main  point  by  our  Baptist  brethren 
themselves.  It  is,  indeed,  the  only  ground  on  which  I 
can  conceive  that  a  candid  scholar  would  be  willing  to 
take  the  exclusive  position  assumed  by  the  '  close  com- 
munion Baptists.'  " 

"But  the  argument,  on  this  ground,  in  favor  of  im- 
mersion derives  all  its  strength  from  a  mistaken  assumption 
that  it  is  in  point,  when,  in  fact,  it  has  little  or  nothing  to 
do  with  the  subject.  Learned  men,  on  the  Baptist  side  of 
the  controversy,  may  have  thus  been  led,  by  their  famili- 
arity with  the  Greek  classics,  to  take  up  a  false  issue  to 

*"  The  proportion  of  the  Christian  world  who  practice  immersion  or 
submersion,  is  very  small.  Of  the  sixty  or  seventy  millions  of  Protes- 
tants of  all  denominations  in  the  world,  probably  not  a  fiftieth  part  hav6 
been  baptized  in  this  way.  Dr.  Kurtz  says  :  '  Probably  not  one  sixtieth 
part  practice  submersion.'  All  the  rest  administer  baptism  by  aspersion 
or  sprinkling. 

"  I  mention  this  fact  rather  as  a  matter  of  information  than  as  an 
argument.  And  since  our  Baptist  brethren  sometimes  claim  the  practice 
of  the  Greek  Church  in  favor  of  their  mode  of  baptism,  it  may  be  proper 
here  to  remark,  that  the  Greek  Church  maintains  that  trine  immersion 
— plunging  three  times — is  absolutely  necessary.  After  these  immer- 
sions, they  sprinkle  the  subject  with  Water.  They  cannot  be  claimed 
therefore,  as  the  exclusive  supporters  of  either  mode,  while  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  whose  example  is  quite  as  worthy  of  imitation,  prac- 
tices only  sprinkling,  so  far  as  water  is  used.  But  these  are  both  idola- 
trous churches,  whose  practice  have  no  authority  with  us."  —  Doctor 
Peters,  pp.  20,  21. 


4S  IMPORT    Of    BAPTiZC. 

which  they  have  applied  their  philology,  in  a  manner  very 
satisfactory  to  themselves,  while  'prejudiced,  men  have  felt 
it  incumbent  on  them  so  to  interpret  the  scripture  expres- 
sion relating  to  baptism,  as  to  make  them  conform  to 
the  imperious  demands  of  their  philological  argument* 
But  their  argument,  as  I  have  said  —  and  will  now 
proceed  to  show  — ■  has  little  or  nothing  to  do  with  the 
subject." 

"  The  question  in  dispute  can  never  be  settled  by  proving 
the  meaning  of  the  word  bapAizo,  in  ancient  heathen  Greek, 
though  it  is  easy  to  show,  and  has  been  abundantly  proved 
by  our  best  philologists,  that  the  argument  is  not  wholly 
with  the  Baptists,  even  on  that  score.  The  word  means 
to  tinge,  to  dye,  to  smear,  <fec,  as  well  as  to  immerse.  The 
editor  of  Calmet's  Dictionary,  quotes  some  eighty  exam-5 
pies,  taken  in  part  from  the  ancient  fathers  and  classical 
writers,  but  mostly  from  the  Bible>  in  every  one  of  which, 
the  word  in  question  implies  less  than  submersion,  and  in 
most  of  them,  no  more  than  sprinkling,  moistening,  pour- 
ing, or  staining.  But  I  leave  that  argument  as  wholly 
irrelevant  to  the  precise  point  of  difference  between  us  and 
our  Baptist  brethren. 

"The  true  question  is,  what  was,  and  is,  the  meaning 
of  the  word  bapiizo,  as  uped  in  the  New  Testament,  to 
designate  the  religious  ordinance  of  baptism  ?  Suppose 
we  admit — -as  we  do  not  —  all  that  the  Baptists  claim,  as 
to  the  meaning  of  baptizo  or  baptismos  (baptize  and  bap- 
tism) in  heathen  Greek.  If  it  meant  then  immersion  and 
nothing  else,  still  that  could  not  govern  its  meaning  as 
used  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles  to  designate  an  action 
which  was  utterly  unknown  to  the  Greeks  of  all  preceding 
ages. 

"  Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  Greek  language  had  never 
been  used  to  express  any  of  the  ideas  of  revealed  religion, 
until  the  Jews  were  conquered  by  the  Greeks,  some  three 
hundred  years  before  ^hript/' 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION. 


49 


Soon  after  the  subjugation  of  the  Jews  by  Alexander, 
they  translated  their  own  Scriptures  into  the  Greek  lan- 
guage ;  which  version  was  called  the  Septuagint.  This 
was  done  of  necessity,  from  the  fact,  that  the  Hebrew  had 
ceased  to  be  vernacular  among  the  common  people.  This 
version  was  the  one  in  use  in  the  days  of  the  Saviour,  and 
as  mostly  quoted  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  even  the 
the  learned  Paul  not  excepted, 

§  7.  The  Jewish  Idiom  of  the  Gbeek  Language. 

Pres.  Beecher  says  upon  this  subject,  "The  Septuagint, 
the  Xew  Testament,  and  the  Greek  fathers,  belong  to  our 
system  of  writers.  The  writers  of  the  Xew  Testament 
were  affected  by  the  Septuagint,  hi  their  style  and  use  of 
words.     The  fathers  were  affected  by  both." 

Says  Prof.  Robinson,  in  his  preface  to  his  Lexicon  of 
the  Xew  Testament  : 

"  A  Lexicon  of  the  Xew  Testament,  at  the  present  day, 
presupposes  the  fact,  that  the  language  of  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment, exhibits  in  many  points  a  departure  from  the  idiom 
of  the  Attic  Greek.  This  great  question,  which  so  long 
agitated  the  learned  philologists  of  Europe,  would  seem 
at  present  to  be  put  entirely  at  rest."  The  plan  of  his 
Lexicon,  he  says,  is  "in  defining  words,  those  significa- 
tions are  placed  first,  which  accord  with  Greek  usage." 
'*  Then  follow  those  significations  which  depart  from  Greek 
usage,  and  which  are  to  be  either  illustrated  from  the 
Greek  of  the  Septuagint,  as  compared  with  the  Hebrew, 
or  depends  solely  on  the  usus  loquendi  (customary  use 
of  words)  of  the  Xew  Testament  writers." 

11  Dr.  George  Campbell,  whom  our  Baptist  brethren 
are  fond  of  complimenting  as  one  of  the  most  finished 
Greek  scholars  of  modern  times,  maintains  that  many  of 
the  idioms  of  the  Xew  Testament  Greek  would  not  have 

g 


aO  IMPORT    OF    BAPTIZO. 

been  more  intelligible  to  a  classic  Greek  autbor  than  Ara- 
bic or  Persian."  "  It  is  true/'  says  be,  "  that  as  the  New 
Testament  is  written  in  Greek,  it  must  be  of  consequence 
that  we  be  able  to  enter  critically  into  the  ordinary  import 
of  the  words  of  that  tongue.  But  from  what  has  been 
observed,  it  is  evident,  that  though  in  several  cases  their 
knowledge  may  be  eminently  useful,  it  luill  not  suffice  ; 
nay,  in  many  cases  it  will  be  of  little  or  no  signifi- 
cancy.  Classical  use  both  in  Greek  and  Latin,  is  not 
only,  in  this  study  sometimes  unavailable,  but  may  even 
mislead.     The  sacred  use  and  the  classical  are  often  very 

DIFFERENT." 

Prof.  Stuart,  who  itands  in  the  first  rank  as  a  scholar 
and  Bible  critic,  says,  "If  then  the  Jews  and  inspired 
writers  did  not  speak  and  write  classic  Greek,  if  they 
used  words  not  found  in  any  classic  authors,  how  can  it  be 
certain  that  they  attached  to  the  word  baptizo  the  same 
meaning  it  had  among  the  Pagan  Greeks  ?  Are  we  to 
be  told,  that  it  is  certain  that  words  used  by  two  different 
nations,  speaking  different  idioms  of  the  same  language, 
of  different  manners,  habits,  customs,  and  religion,  have 
precisely  the  same  meaning  !  The  Greeks,  it  is  admitted, 
never  used  the  word  baptizo  in  a  religious  sense  ;  the  Jews 
never  used  it  in  any  other  than  a  religious  sense.  The 
only  way  satisfactorily  to  determine  the  meaning  of  the 
word,  is  to  examine  into  its  use  amongst  the  Jews,  as 
applied  to  their  religious  washings,  and  by  their  inspired 
writers,  previous  to  the  time,  and  at  the  time  our  Saviour 
appropriated  it  to  the  ordinance  of  baptism." 

The  Biblical  Repository,  for  April,  1840,  has  an  article 
on  The  Bible  and  its  Literature,  by  Prof.  E.  Robinson.  In 
this  article,  he  says,  "The  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  the  latter  Greek,  as  spoken  by  foreigners  of  the 
Hebrew  stock,  and  applied  by  them  to  subjects  on  ivhich  it 
has  never  been  employed  by  native   Greeks.     After  the  dis- 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  51 

use  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  in  Palestine,  and  the  irruption 
of  western  conquerors,  the  Jews  adopted  the  Greek  lan- 
guage from  necessity  ;  partly  as  a  conquered  people,  and 
partly  from  intercourse  of  life  and  commerce,  in  colonies, 
in  cities,  founded  like  Alexandria  and  others,  which  were 
peopled  with  throngs  of  Jews.  It  was,  therefore,  the 
spoken  language  of  ordinary  life  which  they  learned,  not 
the  classic  style  of  books  which  elsewhere  come  down  to 
us.  But  they  spake  it  as  foreigners,  whose  native  tongue 
was  the  later  Armenian  ;  and  it,  therefore,  could  not  fail 
to  acquire  from  their  lips  a  strong  Semitic  character  and 
coloring.  When  to  this  we  add,  that  they  spake  in  Greek 
on  the  things  of  the  true  God,  and  the  relations  of  mankind 
to  Jehovah  and  to  a  Saviour  —  subjects,  to  which  no  native 
Greek  had  ever  applied  his  beautiful  language,  it  will  be 
obvious  that  an  appeal  merely  to  classic  Greek  and  its 
philology,  will  not  suffice  for  the  interpretation  of  the 
Xew  Testament.  The  Jewish  Greek  must  be  studied  almost 
as  an  independent  dialect."  &c. 

"  This  change  of  meaning  in  many  words  of  the  Greek 
language,  upon  adapting  it  to  the  idiom  and  observance 
of  revealed  religion,  was  a  matter  of  necessity  :  and  that 
aside  from  the  natural  influence  of  the  Hebraic  idiom. 
It  prevailed  very  gradually  ;  its  genius  received  a  mould 
from  the  genius  of  the  Hebrew.  Greek  words  were 
applied  to  Jewish  ideas,  and  to  ideas  which  had  never 
been  compounded  into  an  existence  in  the  land  of  classic 
Greek :  as  in  the  words  translated  holy,  holiness,  sin, 
faith,  repentance,  justification,  salvation.  Carry  the 
gospel  to  China  or  Hindostan,  or  among  the  tribes  of 
our  American  Indians,  it  brings  them  a  multitude  of 
ideas  which  are  peculiar  to  revealed  religion.  To  ex- 
press these  ideas,  the  old  words  of  their  language  must 
receive  a  new  meaning,  or  they  must  coin  new  words  — 
or  they  must   adopt  words  from  the  language  of  those 


52  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO. 

who  brought  them  the  new  religion,  or  from  some  othei' 
quarter.    *     *      * 

"  The  sole  intent  of  all  this  discussion  about  the  classic 
use  and  the  New  Testament  use,  is  to  show  that  the  word 
baptize  in  the  New  Testament,  may  have  left  its  primary 
classic  signification  and  have  received  a  generic  sacred  use, 
equivalent  to  washing  or  purifying,  without  the  least  refer- 
ence to  the  mode  in  which  that  '  washing  of  water'  is  per* 
formed.  Whether  this  be  the  fact  or  not,  is  to  be  learned 
not  from  the  Greek  classics,  but  from  the  New  Testament 
itself.  As  to  the  matter  of  fact,  Mark,  and  Luke,  and 
Paul  are  better  witn?sses  concerning  what  they  themselves 
understood  by  the  word  baptize,  thanXenophon,  Aristotle, 
or  than  even  that  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Jewish 
Josephus,  when  he  is  using  the  woid  in  the  sense  of  the 
Greek  classics,  with  no  reference  to  its  use  as  applied  to  a 
religious  ordinance. 

"Will  any  Baptist  make  an  issue  on  this  point,  and 
maintain  that  Apostles  and  Evangelists  are  not  to  be  heard 
in  evidence  ?  Will  any  Baptist  maintain  that  Evangelists 
and  Apostles  may  not  explain  their  own  meaning  in  just 
the  same  way  that  heathen  Greeks  may  explain  theirs  ? 
Will  any  Baptist  maintain,  that  when  the  testimony  of 
the  New  Testament  writers  differs  from  that  of  the  heathen 
Greeks,  the  New  Testament  witness  is  not  to  be  heard 
before  any  heathen  and  before  all  the  heathen  classics 
together?  In  fine,  the  question  here  is,  '  is  the  Holy 
Ghost  a  competent  and  credible  witness '  as  to  the  sense 
in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  uses  the  word  baptize"  Dr. 
Hall,  pp.  99,  100. 

With  all  due  respect  for  our  Baptist  brethren,  I  hum- 
bly conceive  that,  in  this  matter,  they  have  fallen  into  an 
egregious  error,  in  their  attempted  correction  of  our  com- 
mon translation. 

To  the  Bibles  and  Testaments  issued  by  their  society, 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION. 


53 


they   prefix    a   glossary,    containing   among    others,   the 
following  words,  thus : 

"Meaning  of  the  words  used  in  the  translation. 

Aggelos,     Angel,        Messenger. 
Baptizo,       Baptize,     Immerse. 
Baptismos,  Baptism,  Immersion. 
Ekklesia,   Church,     Congregation. 

"It  is  maintained  that  those  words,  and  some  others, 
are  improperly,  if  not  dishonestly,  left  untranslated,  and 
that  the  words  which  are  given  in  the  third  column  as  the 
meaning  ought  to  be  substituted  for  the  words  adopted  in 
our  translation.  Thus  when  we  read  'Church,'  we  ought 
to  read  'Congregation,'  when  we  read  'Angel'  in  our 
version,  we  ought  to  read  '  Messenger  ; '  when  we  read 
'  Baptize,'  we  ought  to  use  '  Immerse,'  and  when  we  read 
'Baptism,'  we  ought  to  read  'Immersion.'"  Dr.  Hall, 
pp.  15,  16. 

"  The  word  pneuma  (spirit)  for  instance,  in  the  most 
ancient  Greek,  meant  wind  or  breath,  and  nothing  further. 
But  in  adapting  this  word  to  express  the  ideas  of  revealed 
religion,  the  sacred  writers  use  it  to  signify  spirit,  as  the 
spirit  of  man  and  the  Spirit  of  God. 

"The  word  aggelos,  (angel,)  in  the  heathen  Greek, 
signified  simply  a  messenger,  a  person  by  whom  news  is  con- 
veyed ;  and  the  idea  of  a  spiritual  messenger  from  God, 
called  aggelos,  was  unknown  to  the  Greek  language.  But  the 
sacred  writers  appropriated  this  word  almost  exclusively 
to  the  expression  of  this  idea.  It  means  in  the  Bible  what 
it  did  not  mean  in  ancient  Greek  :  a  spiritual  messenger 
and  servant  of  God. 

"The  Baptists  then,  if  they  would  be  consistent  with 
themselves,  in  claiming  a  literal  translation  of  baptizo, 
according  to  heathen  or  secular  meaning,  must  do  the 
same  in  respect  to  the  words  pneuma  and  aggelos.      But  if 


54  niroRT  of  baptizo. 

the)'-  do  this,  they  must  read  the  passage,  John  iii,  5. 
'Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  wind  (the 
Spirit)  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God;'  and 
John  iii,  6,  'That  which  is  born  of  the  wind  is  wind.'1 
And  they  must  make  the  sacred  writer  declare,  Acts  iii,  8, 
that  the  Sadducees  say,  '  There  is  no  resurrection,  neither 
messenger  nor  wind.''  The  same  absurdity  would  occur 
from  the  carrying  out  of  this  principle  in  respect  to  many 
other  Greek  words,  used  in  the  Xew  Testament,  to  express 
the  peculiar  ideas  of  revealed  religion."*     Dr.  Peters. 

§  8.  Translating  the  word  Baptizo. 

"  Our  English  translators  employed  the  words  baptize 
and  baptism,  which  have  been  for  ages  in  common  use,  to 
denote  the  ordinance,  and  which  had  become  vernacular  in 
the  English  tongue.  Of  Greek  origin  the  words  undoubt- 
edly were,  but  they  were  as  well  understood  as  the  words 
geography,  astronomy,  biography,  rhetoric,  grammar,  and 
history,  are  now  ;  which  are  as  truly  of  Greek  original, 
and  as  purely  Greek,  as  the  words  baptize  and  baptism. 
*  *  *  *  The  word  immerse  is  as  purely 

Latin  as  baptize  is  Greek,  and  could  not  have  been  better 
understood  than  the  word  baptize.  Baptize  became  an 
English  word  as  soon  as  the  Gospel  was  preached  in  Eng- 
land ;  and  our  Baptist  brethren  contend  that  baptism  was 
then  performed  by  immersion.  Had  this  been  the  case, 
and  had  the  old  Britons  been  taught  to  consider  immersion 
the  essence  of  baptism,  the  word  baptism  in  their  language 

*  Let  it  bo  observed,  we  do  not  affirm  that  the  Xew  Testament  writers 
always  used  the  words  referred  to  in  the  religious  sense.  When  they 
speak  of  ordinary  things  in  the  Greek  language,  they  give  to  its  words  the 
meaning  which  they  had  in  common  use,  before  they  were  appropriated 
to  the  expression  of  religious  ideas.  So  our  Saviour,  in  the  same  con- 
versation in  which  He  used  pneuma  to  signify  spirit  made  use  of  the 
same  word  in  its  primitive  sense,  John  iii,  8,  "The  wind  (pneuma) 
bloweth  where  it  listeth."     Dr.  Peters,  pp.  23.  27. 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  55 

would  have  signified  immersion ;  and  the  Greek  -word 
■baptizo  would  have  as  truly  expressed  the  idea  as  the  Latin 
word  immerse.     *  *  *     Tin   word  was,  indeed, 

originally  translated  into  our  language  ;  but  our  English 
translators  did  not  make  the  transfer  ;  they  gave  a  proper 
translation  —  employing  the  very  word  that  had  been 
exclusively  employed  to  denote  the  ordinance,  ever  since 
the  day  that  the  Christian  religkn  was  first  planted  in 
their  native  land.  Baptize  was  then  as  much  an  English 
word  as  almost  any  word  in  the  English  language,  most 
of  the  words  having  been  as  much  derived  from  a  foreign 
source  as  the  word  baptize.  And  it  would  still  be  as  well 
understood  as  any  other  word,  were  it  not.  that  'a  contro- 
versy exists  as  to  its  meaning  m  the  original, '  so  that  the 
natural  operation  of  the  association  ef  ideas  has  been,  and 
still  is,  interrupted.  Let  the  controversy  cease — let  all 
ihink  correctly  as  to  the  import  of  the  Greek  words,  and 
baptize  and  baptism  will  soon  become  as  significant  as 
catechise  and  catechism,  or  exorcise  and  exorcism,  or 
-even  as  immerse  and  immersion." 

But  neither  the  words,  immerse,  sprinkle,  pour,  nor 
.any  other  word  that  relates  merely  to  the  mode  of  the 
ordinance,  could  express  the  idea  of  baptism.  Baptism 
is  a  sacred  rite  of  peculiar  signification  and  design.  What- 
ever be  the  mode  of  performing  at,  such  a  mode  of  applying 
water  may  be  a  very  familiar  thing  with  any  people  on 
^earth.     *         *  *     We  cannot,  therefore,  claim  that 

the  word  baptize  is  equivalent  to  the  word  sprinkle  :  and 
•do  not  consider  the  word  sprinkle  or  the  word  pour  as  a 
proper  translation  of  the  word  baptize.  No  word  which 
expresses  simply  a  mode  of  applying  water  can  fill  up  the 
Idea  of  the  word  baptizo,  and  any  word  which  limits  the 
application  to  any  one  mode,  is  an  arrant  perversion  of  the 
Scriptures:  which  expressly  speak  of  baptism  under  two 
.modes,  sprinkling  and  pouring  ;  and  refer  to  it  again  an-5 


55 


/MPORT  OF  15 .1  PriZO. 


again  under  the  general  idea  of  a  purifying,  or  a  washing. 
The  mode  immerse,  is  the  very  one  which  finds  the  least 
countenance  in  the  Word  of  God  :  if,  indeed,  there  is  any 
unquestionable  authority  for  that  mode,  wide  from  its 
being  one  of  the  modes  of  washing  or  purifying. 

"  In  translating  the  word  baptizes  therefore,  we  must 
have  a  word  which  possesses  two  qualities.  1st.  It  must 
denote  a  sacred  application  of  water  in  a  ritual  purifying, 
2d.  It  must  not  limit  the  application  to  any  one  mode. 
To  wash  or  to  purify,  comes  nearer  the  true  idea,  than 
either  the  words  sprinkle  or  immerse  ;  and  they  are  the 
only  words  which  can  be  employed  with  exclusive 
reference  to  a  mode  of  baptizing,  consistently  with  the 
Bible.  Yet,  neither  wash  nor  purify,  has  the  exact  and 
full  signification,  by  the  common  acceptation  of  the  terms. 
To  wash  did  not  originally,  in  our  language,  mean  a  ritual 
purification,  much  less  did  immerse  have  that  meaning; 
and  to  'purify  does  not  in  the  common  use  of  our  language, 
signify  necessarily  an  application  of  water.  "We  may  use 
them,  with  a  modification  of  their  common  meaning  ;  and 
the  connection  will  show  in  what  sense  they  are  used. 
But  after  all,  when  the  new  idea  of  baptism  came  into  the 
minds  of  the  old  Britons,  they  needed  either  a  new  word, 
or  a  new  adaptation  of  an  old  word  to  express  that  idea. 
They  wanted  a  term  which  should  express  a  ritual  purify- 
ing by  some  manner  of  sacred  application  of  water :  and 
it  mattered  not  what  word  they  employed,  nor  from  what 
source  it  was  derived,  provided  they  might  agree  respect- 
ing what  word  should  express  the  idea."  Dr.  Hall,  pp. 
117-121. 

Here  it  may  be  added,  that  onr  venerable  translators,  in 
transferring  the  Greek  word  baptlzo  into  the  English 
Bible,  followed  the  example  of  Jerome  and  the  Latin 
translators  of  the  Vulgate  —  the  Latin  version  of  the 
scriptures  —  which  was  completed  A.  D.  405,  and  is  the 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  57 

one  which  has  been  in  use  in  the  Latin  Church  ever  since  ; 
and  is  held  in  great  veneration  as  a  faithful  version  of  the 
scriptures,  by  the  learned  of  all  nations. 

"  And  there  are  certain  advantages,"  saysPres.Beecher, 
p.  123,  ''in  not  translating,  but  in  transferring  the  word. 
All  Avill  know  that  baptism  means  a  sacred  purification 
or  cleansing,  and  that  baptize  means  to  purify  or  cleanse. 
Sacred  purification  will  then  have  in  all  languages,  one 
and  the  same  sacred  name.  This,  like  John  and  Christ, 
will  be  known  and  read  of  all  men,  in  all  languages,  as 
denoting  either  an  external  sacred  purification,  or  that  one 
sacred  purification  of  the  Spirit  which  it  symbolizes,  and 
which  is  by  the  Apostle  associated  with  one  Lord  and  one 
faith. 

"  But  if  the  word  baptize  is  to  be  translated  and  not 
transferred,  it  should  by  all  means  be  translated  purify* 
and  not  immerse.  To  translate  it  immerse,  is  but  to  per- 
petuate error  and  sectarianism,  by  a  false  translation  of 
the  Word  of  God." 

§9.  Transferring  Peculiar  Words  from  one  Language 
to  another. 

Tres.  Beecher  says,  "  That  to  transfer  words  from  one 
language  to  another,  is  not  to  mistranslate,  but  simply  to 
take  a  word  from  the  stores  of  one  language,  and  by  it  to 
enrich  those  of  another.  The  sense  of  such  a  word  is  to 
be  fixed,  as  is  the  sense  of  all  other  words,  by  the  applica- 
tion of  ideas."  I  am  so  well  pleased  with  Dr.  E.  Hall's 
article  upon  this  subject,  that  I  have  transferred  it  entire 
to  my  own  pages. 

He  says,  pp.  122-125,  "  This  transferring  of  words 
from  one  language  to  another,  is  not  so  uncommon  a  pro- 
cess as  many  of  our  brethren  seem  to  suppose  it.     What 

*  Yet  purify  in  our  language,  would  not  be  a  perfect  translation  of 
thu'word  baptizo,  because  purify  with  us,  bas  no  cxdvsivc  tacred  meaning 


i  IMPORT  OV  BAPTIZO. 

Engli  h    word   shall  be  substituted  for  the  Greek  won] 
'Tetrarch,'    Luke  iii,  1?     Wnal    for   the   Greek    word 

'Pentecost,'  in  Acts  if.  1  ?  What  for  the  Greek  words 
'Christ'  and  'Christians'?  '  Christ '  signifies  anointed, 
awl  so  does  the  KebrAv  '.Messiah.'  Bui  to  translate  the 
word,  in  a  cases,  on  the  principle  contended  for  by  our 
Baptisl  brethren,  would  confound  and  destroy  the  mean- 
ing of  many  pa  f  scripture.  The  word  is  applied 
by  way  of  eminence,  as  an  appellation,  to  the  promised 
Redeemer.  In  Matt,  i,  1-18,  and  Mark  i,  as  often 
where,  our  Lord  is  called,  not  'Jesus  the  Christ.'  As 
George  ( 'ampbell  says,  !>.  V.,  Part  J,  'Though  the  word 
'  anoint'  expressed  the  primitive  import  of  the  Hebrew 
name,  it 'Iocs  not  convey  the  idea,  in  which  it  was  then 
universally  understood.  It  was  understood  solely  as  the 
well-know  title  of  an  extraordinary  office,  to  which  there 
was  nothing  similar  among  the  people.'  That  ihe  word 
'Christ'  has  this  peculiar  meaning  when  applied  to  the 
Saviour  may  be  soon  at  once,  by  applying  the  word  in  its 
English  sense,  to  other  personages,  who  are  often  spoken 
of  by  the  same  original  words,  hoth  in  Hebrew  and  Greek. 
How  would  if.  sound  to  hear  David  speaking  of  Saul,  at 
in  I  Samuel  xxiv,  0,  and  repeatedly  call  that  wicked  king 
the  'Christ  of  the  Lord?  How  would  it  sound,  in  lsa. 
xliv,  1,  to  hear1  the  Lord  speaking  to  Cyrus,  as  to  his 
'Christ'?  or,  in  Psalm  CV,  'Touch  not  my  Christ!" 
Here  the  same  as  imperatively  demands  that  the  word  be 
translated  according  to  its  original  import,  as  other  pas* 
sages  do,  that  it  should  not  be  translated,  but.  transferred. 
"]  suppose  it  would  be  lawful  t<»  balk  bo  the  Hindoos 
or  the  Burmans,  about  the  Jewish  'Synagogues,'  though 
that  too,  is  a  word  of  Greek  origin.  If  any  heathen  have 
HO  term  for  such  beings  as  devils,  I  suppose  it  would  be 
lawful  to  introduce  to  them  such  words  as  the  Greek 
'  Diabolop/    or  the   English   word  deril.      It  would  be  a 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  -V.) 

matter  of  indifference  whether  you  introduce  to  them  our 
Hebraic  English  word  '  Sabbath,'  and  teach  them  its  mean- 
ing ;  or  teach  them  how  to  use  one  of  their  own  old  words 
with  a  new  meaning.  The  volume  of  God's  Word  might 
retain  its  Greek  English  name  Bible,  or  it  might  be  turned 
intothe  words  vernacular  among  the  heathen  for  'Writings' 
or  for  '  The  Book  ; '  only  teaching  them  to  give  a  new  idea 
to  their  common  words.  Such  word-;  as  '  Jubilee,'  'ho- 
mer,' 'ephah,'  '  shekel,'  '  cherubim,'  might  be  transferred, 
or  old  words  selected,  and  taught  to  bear  a  meaning  not 
originally  their  own,  as  should  be  found  most  convenient. 
A  scholar,  dealiHg  in  profane  literature  only,  in  translating 
from  the  ancient  Greek  writers,  or  from  Cicero  or  Tacitus, 
might  find  himself  compelled,  either  to  give  erroneous 
ideas,  or  to  transfer  into  Burmese,  or  Japanese,  such 
words  as  '  Archon,'  '  Consul,'  '  Pretor,'  '  Questor,'  '  Cen- 
sor,' 'Senator,'  'Dictator,'  'Tribune.'  'Who,'  says 
Campbell,  '  consider  their  names,'  (as  transferred  into 
our  langague,)  'as  barbarious  V '  'To  have  employed 
instead  of  them,  '  Alderman,'  'Sheriff,'  &c,  we  should 
have  justly  thought  much  more  explicable.'  'I  have 
heard'  says  he,  '  of  a  Dutch  translator  of  Cesar's  Com- 
mentaries, who  always  rendered  Consul,  Burgomaster ; 
and  in  the  te,  all  the  other  officers  and  magisi 

of  Rome.'  How  could  we  have  translated  the  Latin 
classics,  and  given  the  true  idea,  unless  we  kad  naturalized 
in  such  case*  the  very  Latin  words,  and  learned  the  ideas 
and  the  name-  together  ?  Where  would  have  been  our 
English  ideas  of  such  a  thing  as  a  '  libation,'  an  '  ovation,' 
a  'lustration,'  had  we  not  imported,  not  only  the  names, 
but  the  very  ideas,  from  the  language  and  custom 
heathenism?  Whence  comes  our  English  word  'tri- 
umph?' Whence  comes  the  new  English  words  '  Sultan,' 
'Pacha.'  'Khan,'  'Bey?'  What  limit Hs  there  to  the 
J.:ansferring  of  the  very  words  of  the  people  who  bring 


60  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO. 

U8  new  things  and  now  ideas  ?  Look  at  our  military 
terms  —  almost  all  are  adopted  and  transferred  from  the 
French.  Look  at  our  terms  of  chemistry,  botany,  and 
zoology  :  how  many  of  them  have  been  recently  com- 
pounded from  the  Greek. 

"Now,  unless  baptism  is  already  in  use  among  the 
heathens  as  a  religious  purification,  and  expressed  by  a 
word  of  their  own,  having  this  precise  idea  in  distinction 
from  the  idea  of  any  simple  mode  of  administering  water, 
or,  at  least,  in  addition  to  such  an  idea  of  mode,  it  must 
be  as  inadequate  and  inaccurate  a  translation  which  shall 
use  an  old  word  of  theirs,  referring  simply  to  the  mode 
of  applying  water,  as  it  would  be  to  turn  the  Roman 
Consul  into  a  Dutch  Burgomaster.  The  translation  is 
inadequate,  it  is  incorrect,  it  misleads,  and  that  aside  from 
the  consideration  that  to  translate  baptizo,  immerse,  makes 
the  Bible  speak  falsehood,  even  with  regard  to  the  mere 
mode.  You  may  transfer  the  word  baptizo  —  you  may 
call  baptism,  in  Siamese,  (as  the  Baptist  Bible  Society 
say  our  Missionaries  have  done,)  '  Baptecsamay,'  conform- 
ing the  shape  of  the  word  to  the  genius  of  the  language, 
as  in  the  Latin  baptizare  and  the  English  baptize,  and  it  is 
correct.  It  is  as  easy  to  teach  them  the  new  word  as  it 
is  to  teach  them  the  new  idea —  the  positive  and  peculiar 
scripture  idea  of  baptize.  Or  you  may  translate  baptizo 
into  a  word  signifying  to  wash  ;  still,  better  if  you  can 
find  a  word  which  signifies  a  ritual  purifying  by  washing  ; 
and  you  have  given  a  most  faithful  translation.  But  to 
translate  the  word  by  the  word  immerse,  is  to  give  an  in- 
adequate, inaccurate,  and  we  contend  a  false  idea." 

Dr.  Peters,  in  a  note,  p.  33,  says,  "  I  do  not  mean  to 
affirm  that  there  was  no  reason  for  the  selection  of  baptizo 
to  denote  Christian  Baptism,  rather  than  any  other  Greek 
word.  There  is  an  analogy  between  its  primitive  meaning 
and  its  religious  meaning,  which  was  a  good  reason  for 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  61 

its  .selection.  But  since  it  has  been  appropriated  to  this 
specific  use,  we  are  to  learn  its  new  meaning,  not  fiom 
that  analogy,  but  from  the  thing  which  it  now  signifies. 

§  10.  The  Import  of  Bapto,  the  Root. 

Baptizo  is  the  word  chosen  by  the  Hoi}'  Ghost  to  sym- 
bolize spiritual  purification.  It  is  the  principal  derivative 
from  bapto  the  root  ;  and  we  come  now,  in  the  course  of 
this  investigation,  directly  to  the  definition  of  these  terms. 
It  is  usual  in  discussions  upon  the  subject  of  baptism,  to 
define  the  root  bapto,  and  an  argument  is  not  considered 
complete  without  it.  From  the  fact,  that  our  Baptist 
brethren  formerly  took  the  ground,  that  bapto  means  to 
dip  or  immerse,  alone,  as  its  primitive  and  literal  meaning, 
and  that  any  other  shade  of  meaning,  still  further  from 
that  of  immerse,  is  tropical  or  figurative.  But  the  more 
intelligent  Baptists  have  now  abandoned  that  exclusive 
ground,  and  admit  that,  by  an  extension  of  the  literal 
sense,  bapto  means  to  dip,  color,  stain,  dye,  wet,  etc.,  so 
that  what  may  be  said  under  this  section  would  be  a  work 
of  supererogation,  were  it  considered  necessary  to  render 
the  argument  complete.  For  all  that  is  gained  to  the 
cause  of  truth,  in  this  part  of  the  investigation,  is  this, 
if  we  are  able  to  show  that  bapto  the  root,  so  far  departs 
from  its  original  primary  meaning  of  dip,  as  to  include 
the  idea  of  dying,  tinging,  moistening,  smearing,  and  even 
sprinkling  ;  and  that  by  an  extension  of  its  literal  meaning, 
it  irresistibly  furnishes  an  argument,  that  baptizo,  the 
derivation,  is  also  capable  of  a  similar  extension  and 
departure  from  its  primitive  meaning  to  immerse. 

The  word  bapto  occurs  in  the  Septuagint  version  of  the 
Old  Testament  four  times,  and  in  the  New  Testament* 

*  Bapto  occurs  in  Luke  xvi,  24,  John  xiii,  26,  and  Rev.  xix,  13  :  and 
the  compound  verb  embapto  occurs  in  Matt,  xxvi,  23,  Mark  xiv,  20,  and 
John  xiii,  26. 


62  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO. 

six  times;]  and  it  is  invariably  rendered  dip  by  our  Eng- 
lish translators,  in  every  instance  except  one,  with  the 
idea  of  a  partial  inunersion  or  dipping  ;  and  is  never 
employed  in  a  religious  sense,  but  always  in  its  original 
classical  meaning.  It  occurs  in  Dan.  iv,  33,  where  Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  driven  from  the  society  of  men,  and  his 
"body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven."  Here  bapto  is 
rendered  wet  ;  and  there  could  be  no  possible  immersion 
in  water,  for  it  was  with  the  dew  of  heaven.  And  in 
Rev.  xix,  13,  it  also  occurs  in  its  participial  form  ;  "And 
He  was  clothed  in  a  vesture  dipped  in  blood."  Origen, 
one  of  the  Greek  fathers,  wrho  lived  in  the  third  century, 
and  was  one  of  the  brightest  scholars  of  the  age,  and,  of 
course,  well  acquainted  with  his  native  tongue  ;  in  pre- 
paring a  copy  of  the  scriptures,  substituted  rantizo  to 
sprinkle  for  bapto  to  dip,  in  this  passage.  Hence  it  reads, 
"And  He  wras  clothed  with  a  garment  sprinkled  with 
blood."  I  will  just  add,  the  Latin  Vulgate,  the  Syrian, 
and  the  Ethiopic  version,  all  translate  bapto  in  this  text, 
by  the  word  sprinkle,  in  their  respective  languages ;  and 
so  does  Prof.  Stuart  also,  in  his  work  on  the  Apocalypse. 
Now  let  us  examine  the  definitionr  of  some  of  the  ablest 
lexicographers,  as  they  occur  in  the  published  debate  be- 
tween Rice  and  Campbell,  p.  68,  omitting  the  Latin! 
Hendricus  defines  it,   "  To  immerse,  to  plunge,  to  dye,  to 

wash,"  <fec. 
Scapula, —  "  To  immerse,  to  plunge  ;  also,  to  stain,  dye, 

color — also,  to  wash." 
Cordon, —  "To  dye,  to  cleanse." 
Ur sinus, —  "To  dip,  to  dye,  to  wash,  sprinkle." 
Schrivellius, — "To  dip,  to  dye,  to  wash,  to  draw  water." 
Groves, — "To  dip,  plunge,    immerse,    to  wash,   to   wet, 

moisten,  sprinkle,  to  steep,  imbue,  to  dye."  &c. 
Donnnegan, — "  To  dip,  to  plunge  into  water,  to  submerge, 

to  wash,  to  dve,  to  color."  (fee. 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  G3 

The  lexicons,  observe,  not  only  define  the  word  bapto, 
to  dip,  plunge,  dye,  but  also,  to  wash.  Xow,  every  one  at 
all  acquainted  with  language,  knows,  that  wash  as  well  as 
cleanse,  dye,  color,  is  an  open  term,  and  never  expresses 
mode,  and  may  be  performed  by  different  modes  of  appli- 
cation. Scapula  defines  this  word  not  only  to  dip,  dye, 
&c. ;  but  also  to  wash,  (in  any  mode,)  and  he  is  one  of 
the  best  authorities.  Groves  goes  even  further,  and  defines 
it  to  wash,  and  also  to  wet  ;  and  not  only  to  wet,  but  also 
to  moisten  ;  and  not  only  to  moisten,  but  also  to  sprinkle. 
Even  Dr.  Carson,  the  great  Baptist  critic,  admits,  that  it 
does  not  always  express  mode.  Hear  him,  p.  62,  "A 
word  may  come  to  enlarge  its  meaning,  so  as  to  lose  sight 
of  its  origin.  This  fact  must  be  obvious  to  every  smat- 
terer  in  philology.  Had  it  been  attended  to,  Baptists 
would  have  found  no  necessity  to  prove  that  bapto,  when 
it  signifies  to  dye,  always  signifies  to  dye  by  dipping  ;  and 
their  opponents  would  have  seen  no  advantage  from  prov- 
ing that  it  signifies  dying  in  any  manner.  Again,  "Bapto 
signifies  to  dye  by  sprinkling,  as  properly  as  by  dipping  ; 
though  originally  it  was  confined  to  the  latter."  Again, 
11  Nor  are  such  applications  of  the  word  to  be  accounted 
for  by  metaphor  as  Dr.  Gale  asserts.  They  are  as  literal 
as  the  primary  meaning.  It  is  by  extension  of  the  literal 
meaning,  and  not  by  figure  of  any  kind,  that  words  come 
to  depart  so  far  from  their  original  signification.  The 
word  bapto,  therefore,  not  only  expresses  the  application 
of  a  fluid  by  sprinkling,  but  this  is  a  literal  signification.' * 
I  will  next  illustrate  the  simple  process  by  which  words 
pass  from  one  meaning  to  another,  by  a  quotation  from 
Pres.  Beecher.  His  illustration  is  so  apposite  that  I 
cannot  forego  transcribing  it.  He  says,  p.  11,  "The 
verb  to  spring,  denotes  an  act,  and  gives  rise  to  a  noun  also 
denoting  an  act.  A  perception  of  similitude  transfers  the 
word  to  the  issuing  of  water  from  a  fountain  — to  the 


64  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO. 

motion  of  a  watch-spring  —  and  to  the  springing  of  plants 
in  the  spring  season  of  the  year.  Yet,  who  does  not  feel 
that  to  be  able  to  trace  such  a  process  of  thought,  is  far 
from  proving  that  when  a  man  in  one  place  says,  1  made 
a  spring  over  the  ditch,  in  another,  I  broke  the  spring  of 
my  watch,  in  another,  I  drank  from  the  spring,  in  another, 
I  prefer  spring  to  winter,  he  means  in  each  case  the  same 
thing  by  the  word  spring  ?  And  when  in  using  these 
wrords,  always  resort  to  the  original  idea  of  the  verb  ? 
Indeed,  so  far  is  it  from  being  true  that  this  is  commonly 
done,  that  most  persons  are  pleased  when  the  track  of  the 
mind  is  uncovered,  and  the  path  is  pointed  out  by  which 
it  had  passed  from  meaning  to  meaning,  as  if  a  new  idea 
had  been  acquired.  So  conversation,  prevent,  charity,  as 
now  used,  have  obviously  departed  widely  from  the  sense 
in  which  they  were  used  in  the  days  of  the  translators  of 
the  Bible."  "  So  the  words  bind  and  bonds  originally 
meant  to  tie  up  or  manacle  with  cords  or  chains.  But 
who  thinks  now  of  putting  cords  or  fetters  on  a  man 
when  he  is  bound  to  keep  the  peace  or  to  appear  in  court ; 
or  when  he  is  put  under  bonds  to  fill  the  condition  of  a 
bargain  or  agreement."  See  the  subject  fully  illustrated 
under  Sec.  12. 

§  11.  Import  op  the  word  Baptizo. 

We  have  now  reached,  in  the  course  of  this  discussion, 
the  definition  of  the  word  baptizo.  This  word  occurs 
several  times  in  the  Septuagint,  but  is  not  employed  in  a 
single  instance  in  that  version,  in  its  real  given  sense.  It 
occurs  in  the  New  Testament, —  in  some  shape  or  other, 
more  than  one  hundred  times,  and  is  not  translated  into 
our  English  version  but  three  times  ;  but  is  merely  trans- 
ferred, as  we  have  already  seen,  with  the  English  transla- 
tion ize  and  ism,  to  suit  the  genius  of  our  langague.     It  is 


translated  in  Mark  vii,  4,  8  ;  Luke  xi,  38,  and  Heb.  ixj 
10,  by  our  English  word  wash  ;  but  in  these  instances, 
there  is  no  reference  whatever  to  the  ordinance  of  baptism* 
but  to  the  legal  or  ceremonial  purification  of  the  Mosaic 
dispensation.     And,  although  we  take  the  ground  that, 
when  employed  to  denote  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  it  is 
to  be  understood  in  a  sense  peculiar  to  that  rite  ;  still,  we 
admit,  that  there  is  an  analogy  existing  between  the  sacied 
and  profane  use  of  the  term  baptizo  ;  and  on  that  account, 
and  also  to  render  the  argument  complete,  we  will  refer 
the  reader  to  the  definitions  of  the  word,  as  is  customary. 
To  do  which,  I  will  recur  to  the  lexicographers  and  the 
definitions  adduced  by  Dr.  Rice,  in  his  discussion  with  Aj 
Campbell,  Debate  pp.  69,70,  omitting  the  Latin  as  before; 
Scapula  defines  the  word  baptizo,  "To  dip  or  immerse — ■ 
also,  to  dye  ;  as  Ave  immerse  things  for  the  purpose  of 
coloring  or  washing  them  ;  also,  to  plunge,  submerge, 
to  cover  with  water  ;  also  to  cleanse  to  wash." 
Hendricus, —  1.  "To  dip,  immerse,  to  cover  with  water; 
2.  to  cleanse  to  tvash;  3.  to  baptize  in  a  sacred  sense." 
Stephenus, —  "To  dip,  immerse,  as  we  immerse  things  for" 
the  purpose  of  coloring  or  washing  ;  to  merge,  sub- 
merge, to  cover  with  water»— to  cleanse  to  wash." 
Schleusner, —  "Not    only   to    plunge,  immerse,   but   to 

cleanse,  wash,  to  purify  with  Water." 
Parkhurst,  —  "To  immerse  in,   or  wash  with  water  in 

token  of  purification." 
Robinson, —  "To  immerse,  to  sink  ;  for  example,  spoken 
of  ships,  galleys,  &c.  In  the  New  Testament  to  wash, 
to  cleanse  by  washing  —  to  wash  one's  self,  to  bathe, 
perform  ablution,"  &c-. 
Schrivellius , — "  To  baptize,  immerse,  to  cleanse,  to  wash.'* 
Groves, —  "To  dip,  immerse,  immerge,  plunge,  to  wash, 
cleanse,  purify  —  Baptizomai,    to   wash    one's   S(x\f, 
bathe,"  etc. 

c 


$6  iMi-oRT  of  iur"rtzo. 

Brttschneider, — "Properly,  often  to  dip,  often  to  Wash; 

then,  1.  .simply  to  wash,  to  cleanse;  in  the  middle 

voice,  1  wash  or  cleanse  myself." 
Suiclar, —  "To  sink,    plunge,    immerse;  to    wet,    wash, 

cleanse,  purify,"  &{>■. 
XVahl,  —  1.   "To  wash,  to  perform  ablution,  cleanse;  2> 

to  immerse." 
Greenfield,^-"  To  immerse,  immerge,  submerge,  sink;  in 

New  Testament,  to  wash,  perform  ablution,  cleanst> 

to  immerse." 
Dr.  Rice  very  pertinently  remarks,  "  I  haVe  now  adduced 
the  principal  lexicons,  ancient  and  modern ;  and  it  is  a 
fact,  that  with  remarkable  unanimity,  they  testify  that  the 
Word  baptizo  signifies,  not  only  to  sink,  dip,  plunge,  &c> 
but  also,  to  ivash,  to  cleanse,  to  purify.  Scapula,  the 
learned  lexicographer,  to  whom  Mr.  Campbell  appealed 
With  so  much  confidence,  defines  it,  not  only  to  dip,  plunge* 
&c,  but  to  wash,  to  cleanse  ;  and  mark  the  fact,  he  refers 
to  the  New  Testament  as  the  place  in  which  we  find  the 
word  used  in  the  sense  of  washing  and  cleansing.  Now, 
every  one  at  all  acquainted  with  language,  knows  that  the 
words  wash  and  cleanse  do  not  express  mode.  They  sig- 
nify washing  and  cleansing  in  any  mode. 

"Let  me  here  distinctly  remark,  that  I  am  not  contend- 
ing that  the  word  baptizo,  definitely  expresses  pouring  of 
sprinkling.  I  maintain,  that  as  used  in  the  scriptures,  it 
expresses  the  thing  done- — the  application  of  water  to  a 
subject,  but  not  the  mode  of  doing  it  ;  that  the  mode  in 
which  baptism  was  administered  cannot  be  determined  ly 
the  word,  but  must  be  learned  from  the  connection  and 
circumstances,  or  from  other  sources* 

"Hendricus  defines  the  word  —  first,  to  immerse  or 
plunge,  and  secondly,  to  wash,  cleanse,  without  reference 
to  mode.  Schleusner,  besides  the  definition  to  plunge,  &c, 
gives  three  others  which  express  the  thing  dc*e,  but  not 


PHlLOLOCilCAL  DEFINITION.  t)  i 

the  mode  of  doing  it  :  viz.,  to  cleanse,  to  wash,  -to  purify 
"with  water.  Parkhurst  makes  it  mean  either  to  immerse 
in,  or  to  wash  with  water.  Robinson,  one  of  the  first 
lexicographers,  first  gives  the  definition  to  immerse,  to 
sink,  <fcc,  but  in  the  2few  Testament,  the,  first  meaning  he 
finds  is  to  wash,  to  cleanse  by  washing,  to  perform  ablution. 
Bretsclmejder  gives  as  the  general  meaning  of  baptizo, 
properly,  often  to  dip,  often  iovxish —  thus  putting  these 
two  definitions  upon  a  perfect  equality  with  each  ether. 
His  is  a  lexicon  of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  first 
meaning  he  there  finds,  is,  simply  to  wash,  to  deanse-. 
Here  certainly,  is  no  immersing.  *  *  *  Suidar,  one 
of  the  ablest  'Lexicographers  we  have  seen,  defines  it,  not 
conly  to  plunge,  sink,  <fcc,  but  to  wet,  wash,  demist,  <fec. ; 
and  every  one  knows  that  a  thing  may  be  weited,  washed-, 
or  cleansed  without  being  immersed.  Greenfield  defines 
it,  as  you  see,  to  sink,  to  wash,"  <fcc. 

"Let  the  facts  now  established  be  remembered:  viz., 
that  the  words  hapio  and  baptizo,  have  several  meanings — - 
that  they  are  used  sometimes  in  the  sense  of  dipping, 
plunging,  sinking ;  sometimes  in  the  sense  of  washing, 
cleansing,  purifying ;  sometimes  in  the  sense  of  pouring, 
sprinkling.  In  the  classics,  I  can  prove,  that  four  times 
in  five  baptizo  expresses  sinking  to  the  bottom.  Let  it  be 
remembered,  too,  that  the  lexicons  refer  to  the  Bible  for 
the  use  of  baptizo  in  the  general  sense  of  washing,  cleans- 
ing,"  &c. 

"I  do  not,  however,  maintain  that  the  mode  in  which 
baptism  is  to  be  administered  is  unhnportant,  though  I  do 
contend  that  it  is  not  essential.  But,  though  baptizo  does 
not  definitely  express  the  mode,  it  may  be  learned  from 
the  design  of  the  ordinance,  and  from  the  circumstances 
-attending  the  administration  of  it;  and  those  evidences 
are  decidedly  in  favor  of  pouring  or  sprinkling." 

I  will  merely  add  here,  that,  from  the  above  catalogue 


6S  import  or  baptize. 

of  definitions,  it  is  evident,  that  the  word  baptizo,  in  iU 
classical  usage,  embraces  a  wide  compass  of  meaning. 
It  is  capable  of  a  variety  of  significations,  ranging  through 
every  shade  of  meaning,  from  a  complete  submersion  in 
water,  to  a  mere  sprinkling  or  wetting  with  water  ;  and 
that  not  by  metaphor,  as  some  contend,  but  extension  of 
its  literal  meaning  ;  that  the  New  Testament  use  of  the 
word  corresponds  in  general,  with  what  the  lexicons  give 
as  the  secondary  meaning  of  the  term  :  viz.,  that  of  ivask, 
cleanse,  purify ;  that  it  corresponds  as  nearly  as  possible- 
with  the  idea  of  the  sacred  ritual  purification  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  as  such  is  synonymous  with  the  Greek 
word  kaiharizo,  (to  purify,)  in  the  Septuagint,  and  that 
it  is  strictly  generic,  and  may  be  performed  by  any  mode 
of  application,- 

I  will  close  this  section  in  the  language  of  Pres.  Beecher, 
somewhat  abridged,  pp.  8-11.  "The  position  which  I 
shall  endeavor  to  prove  by  appeal  to  facts,  is  this,  that 
the  word  baptizo  as  a  religious  term,  means  neither  dip 
nor  sprinkle,  immerse  nor  pour,  nor  any  other  external 
action  in  applying  a  fluid  to  the  body,  or  the  body  to  the 
fluid  —  nor  any  action  which  is  limited  to  oair  mode  of 
performance ;  but  that  as  a  religious  term,  it  means  at  all 
times,  to  purify  or  cleanse — -words  of  a  meaning  so 
general  as  not  to  be  confined  to  any  mode,  or  agent,  or 
means,  or  object,  whether  material  or  spiritual,  but  to 
leave  the  widest  scope  for  the  question  as  to  mode  —  so 
that,  in  their  usage,  it  is  in  every  respect  a  perfect  syno- 
nym of  the  word  katharizo. 

"  Let  it  then  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  question  is  not  this 
—  does  the  word  in  all  its  extent  of  usage  denote  at  any  time 
a  definite  external  act?  Nor  this— is  this  its  original, 
primitive  signification?  Even  if  all  this  were  admitted, 
it  would  not  touch  the  question  —  for,  as  we  all  know, 
nothing  is  more  common  than  for  words  to  be  used  in 


PHILOLOGICAL    DEEIXITIOX.  6§ 

more  meanings  than  one,  and  to  decide  in  what  sense  a 
word  is  used  in  a  given  instance,  we  are  not  to  follow 
etymology  or  fancy,  but  evidence,  derived  from  the  facts 
of  the  case. 

"  With  regard  then  to  the  other  uses  of  the  word  bap- 
tizo,  I  freely  admit  that  in  classic  usage,  it  does,  as  a 
general  fact,  clearly  denote  some  external  act  of  a  specific 
kind,  yet  it  is  by  no  means  clear  to  my  mind  that  it  does 
not  in  different  cases  denote  different  acts. 

1.  "  I  freely  admit,  that  in  numerous  cases,  it  clearly 
denote.-'  to  immerse,  —  in  which  an  agent  submerges  par- 
tially, or  totally  some  person  or  thing. 

2.  "  It  is  also  apjDlied  to  cases  where  a  fluid  without 
an  agent  rolls  over,  or  floods,  and  covers  anything  — -  as 
the  river  overflowing  its  banks,  and  intercepting  and 
overwhelming  land  animals ;  and  as  the  seashore  is 
baptized  and  overwhelmed  by  the  tide. 

3.  "It  is  also  applied  in  cases  where  some  person  or 
thing  sinks  passively  into  the  flood.  Thus  Josephus,  in 
narrating  his  shipwreck  in  the  Adriatic,  uses  this  word 
to  describe  the  sinking  of  the  ship. 

"  I  am  fully  aware  that  by  some  writers  vigorous  efforts 
ate  made  to  reduce  all  these  senses  to  the  original  idea  to 
immerse  or  dip.  But  it  seems  to  me  that  they  are  rather 
led  by  their  zeal  to  support  a  theory,  than  by  a  careful 
induction  from  facts  ;  and  that  they  wrest  facts  to  suit 
their  principles,  rather  than  derive  their  principles  from 
facts.      *      *      * 

"  To  all  this,  however,  I  attach  no  great  importance  in 
the  discussion  of  the  present  question,  unless  it  be  of  use 
in  exposing  the  fallacy  of  all  efforts  to  reduce  this  word 
to  such  a  perfect  simplicity  of  meaning,  even  as  it  regards 
an  external  act,  as  is  claimed  for  it  by  some. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  even  if  I  were  to  admit  that  it? 
original  and   primitive    idea  was  to  immerse,  and    thai 


■  n 


iSipout  of  r..\j --n/.t. 


when  it  denotes  an  external  act,  it  never  departs  from  this 
sense  ;  still  the  question  would  arise,  Is  there  not  another 
meaning  derived  from  the  effects  of  this  act,  and  in  which 
die  mind  contemplates  the  effect  alone,  entirely  irrespective 
of  the  mode  in  which  it  is  produced  ? 

"I  contend  that  there  is  — and  that  as  thorough  cleans- 
ing or  purification  is  often  the  result  of  submersion  in 
water,  so  the  word  haptize  has  come  to  signify  to  cleanse 
or  purify  thoroughly,  without  any  reference  to  the  mode 
in  which  it  is  done." 

._§  12.    The   Process  by  which  Words  pass   from  one 
Meaning  to  another. 

"  ft  may  at  first  sight  seem  an  improbable  position  to 
some,  that  if  a  word  originally  signifies  "  to  immerse," 
it  can  assume  a  meaning  so  remote  from  its  primitive 
sense  as  "to purify, "  and  entirely  drop  all  reference  to 
the  mode.  Yet  the  slightest  attention  to  the  laws  of  the 
mind  and  of  language,  and  to  well  known  facts,  will  show 
that  not  the  least  improbability  of  such  a  result  exists. 

"  Xo  principle  is  more  universally  admitted  by  all 
sound  philologists,  than  that  to  establish  the  original  and 
primitive  meaning  of  a  word,  is  not  at  all  decisive  as  it. 
regards  its  subsequent  usage.  It  often  aids  only  as  giving 
a  clue  by  which  we  can  trace  the  progress  of  the  imagina- 
tion, or  the  association  of  ideas,  in  leading  the  mind  from 
meaning  to  meaning,  on  some  ground  of  relation,  simili- 
tude, or  connection  of  cause  and  effect."  •*  *  *  "To 
establish  such  secondary  meanings,  it  is  not  necessary 
that  we  should  be  able  to  trace  the  course  of  the  mind, 
though  it  is  pleasant  to  be  able  to  do  it.  A  secondary 
meaning,  however  unlike  it  may  seem  to  the  primitive, 
may  yet  be  established  like  any  other  fact  in  the  usage  of 
language,  that  is,  by  appropriate  testimony. 

"  But  whilst  Mich  transitions  are  common  in  all  wordp. 


MtfLOLOGl'CAL    DEFlSiTlOX*  i  I 

they  are  particularly  common  in  words  of  the  class  of 
haptizo,  denoting  action  by,  or  with  reference  to,  a  fluid. 
This  is  owing  to  the  fact,  that  the  effects  produced  by  the 
action,  depend  not  on  the  action  alone,  but  on  the  action 
and  the  fluid  combined  —  and  of  course  may  be  varied  as 
the  fluid  or  its  application  varies,"  *  *  •  "Now  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  sach  transfers  have  taken  place  in  cognate* 
and  similar  words. 

"  I  shall  out  of  many  select  a  few  cases  from  Greek> 
Latin,  and  English  words,  fully  to  illustrate,  and  clearly 
to  confirm  these  principles,  and  to  show  that  they  are 
peculiar  to  no  language,  but  rest  on  universal  laws  of  the 
mind. 

"In  Greek,  all  admit  that  the  most  common  sense  of 
bapto  is  to  dip,  to  immerse.  I  am  willing  to  admit 
that  it  is  the  primitive  sense.  But  it  is  beyond  all  dispute 
that  the  same  word  has  passed  to  the  meaning  to  dye, 
without  any  reference  to  mode.  Great  efforts  were  once 
made  to  deny  this.  But  the  most  intelligent  Baptists  now 
entirely  abandon  this  ground,  and  that  with  the  best 
reason.  And  indeed,  so  far  has  the  word  passed  from 
its  original  sense,  that  it  is  applied  to  coloring  the  surface 
of  an  object  by  gold,  i.  -c.  by  gilding.  A  few  examples 
out  of  many,  in  so  plain  a  case,  must  suffice.  In  the 
battle  of  the  frogs  and  mice,  a  mouse  is  represented  as 
dyeing  or  coloring  the  lake  with  his  blood. 

"  Hippocrates  employs  it  to  denote  dyeing  by  dropping 
the  dyeing  liquid  on  the  thing  dyed.  When  it  drops 
upon  the  garments,  they  are  dyed  (baptetai).  This  surely 
is  not  dyeing  by  dipping." —  (  Carson,  p.  44.) 

M  Again.  In  Arian* — Expedition  of  Alexander  :  '  Xe- 
arclms  relates  that  the  Indian  dye,  (baptontai)  their 
beards  :  It  will  not  be  contended  that  they  dyed  their 
beards  by  immersion.'     (p.  44.) 

"  '  Carson  quotes  cases  in  which  it  is  used  to  describe 


?2  IMPORT    OF    BAPTlZd. 

the  coloring  of  the  hair  :  the  staining  of  a  garment  by 
blood  ;  the  staining  the  hands  by  crushing  a  coloring 
substance  in  it  ;  for  which,  and  other  of  like  kind,  I  refer 
to  him,  and  to  Proft  Stuart.' 

"  It  is  compounded  with  colors  of  all  kinds,  as  of  a 
purple  or  hyacinth  dye.  It  denotes  a  dyer,  a  dyeing  vat, 
a  dye-house,  etc.,  and  it  even  passes,  as  before  stated,  to 
cases  in  which  a  new  color  is  produced  by  the  external 
application  of  a  solid,  as  colored  with  gold,  or  gilded.  But 
it  is  needless  to  quote  at  large  all  the  examples  which 
might  be  adduced  to  illustrate  and  confirm  these  points. 
I  shall  therefore  proceed  to  consider  the  usages  of  a  kindred 
word  in  the  Latin  language. 

"  Tingo,  beyond  all  doubt,  means  to  immerse.  In  this 
sense  Facciolatus  and  Forcellinus  in  their  Totius  Latini- 
tatis  lexicon,  give  bapto  as  its  synonym.  And  as  baptc 
is  used  to  describe  the  immersing  of  an  ax  to  temper  itj 
so  is  tingo  to  describe  similar  operations.  80  Virgil* 
speaking  of  the  operation  of  the  Cyclopean  workmen  of 
Vulcan,  thus  describes  them  as  immersing  their  hissing 
metals  in  water  to  temper  them.  They  dip  (tingunt)  the 
hissing  brass  in  the  lake :  so  speaking  of  a  sword.  He 
had  dipped  (tinxerat)  the  sword  in  Stygian  water.  Cel^ 
sus  speaks  of  sponges  dipped  (tineta)  in  vinegar. 

"  The  setting  of  the  heavenly  bodies  is  spoken  of  as 
an  immersion  in  the  sea,  and  to  describe  this  tingo  is  used  i 
— Virg.  Georg,  'The  winter  suns  haste  to  dip  (tingere) 
themselves  in  the  ocean.'  Phoebus  dips  (tingat)  his 
horses  in  the  deep. 

"  But  to  prove  that  it  means  immerse  is  needless  ;  no 
one  can  deny  it,  nor  is  it  the  point  at  which  I  chiefly  aim. 
This  is,  that  like  bapto,  it  loses  all  reference  to  the  act  of 
immersion,  and  comes  to  signify  simply  to  dye  or  color  in 
anyway.  *  *  *  But  there  is  direct  proof  in  the  Latin 
Classics  of  the  same  kind  as  exists  with  respect  to  bapto. 


§   12  PHILOLOGICAL    DEFINITION.  73 

*'  Horace  uses  the  word  to  denote  the  dyeing  (tingere) 
of  wool  ;  Ovid,  to  denote  the  coloring  of  hair  and  of 
ivory;  Horace,  to  denote  the  coloring  (tinget)  of  the  ax 
used  in  sacrificing  the  victims  ;  Virgil,  to  denote  the 
malignant  effects  of  a  plague  on  cattle,  mentions  that  they 
had  scarce  blood  enough  left  to  color  (tingunter)  the 
knives  used  to  slay  them.  Indeed,  on 'this  word  no  less 
than  on  bapto,  we  have  the  unequivocal  concession  of  Dr. 
Carson,  that  it  means  to  dye.  '  In  Latin  also,  the  same 
word,  tingo,  signifies  both  to  dip,  and  to  dye.'  —  Carson, 
pa ge  54. 

"  In  English,  for  the  sake  of  contrast,  I  shall  select  the 
word  to  wash.  The  original  and  common  idea  of  this 
word  is  undeniably  to  cleanse  by  a  purifying  fluid,  as 
water —  and  that,  without  respect  to  mode.  Of  these 
ideas  in  its  progress  it  drops  all,  and  assumes  a  meaning 
that  involves  neither  to  purify,  nor  to  use  a  fluid  at  all. 
As  washing  is  often  performed  by  a  superficial  applica- 
tion of  a  fluid,  it  often  assumes  this  sense,  and:  loses 
entirely  the  idea  of  cleansing,  as  when  we  speak  of  wash- 
ing a  wound  with  brandy  ;  or  with  some  cooling  appli- 
cation, to  alleviate  inflammation.  In  this  case  we  aim 
not  at  cleansing,  but  at  medicinal  effect.  So  we  can 
speak  of  the  sea  as  washing  the  shore  or  rocks,  denoting 
not  cleansing,  but  the  copious  superficial  application  of  a 
fluid.  Again,  as  a  superficial  application  of  a  fluid  or  a 
coloring  mixture,  is  often  made  for  the  sake  of  changing 
the  color,  we  have  to  white-wash,  to  red-ivash,  to  yellow- 
wash  ;  and  the  substances  or  fluid  mixtures  with  which 
this  is  done,  are  called  washes. 

"  Next  it  drops  the  idea  of  a  fluid  at  all,  and  assumes 
the  sense  of  a  superficial  application  of  a  solid  —  as  to 
wash  with  silver  or  gold.  And  here  a  remarkable  coinci- 
dence in  result,  of  words  in  meaning  originally  unlike, 
deserves  notice,  as  a  striking  illustration  of  the  progress 


7  i  wMfRT  or  jur-nzo.  g  12 

of  the  mind  in  effecting  such  changes.  In  Greek,  bajito 
originally  denotes  to  immerse —  action  alone,  without 
reference  to  effect.  In  English,  wash  denotes  to  cleanse  or 
purify  alone,  without  reference  to  mode.  Yet,  by  the 
operation  of  the  laws  of  association,  Loth  are  used  to 
denote  coloring,  and  Loth  to  denote  covering  superficially 
with  silver  or  gold.  Finally,  when  we  speak  of  the  wash 
of  a  cow-yard,  and  call  those  places  where  deposits  of 
earth  or  filth,  or  vegetable  matter,  are  made,  washes'  who 
will  contend  that  the  idea  to  purity  is  still  retained  ?  *  * 
"  Now  with  such  facts  before  us,  to  increase  the  number 
indefinitely,  were  perfectly  easy,  who  can  say  that  there  is 
the  slightest  improbability  in  the  idea  that  the  word  bap* 
lizo  should  pass  from  the  sense  to  immerse,  to  the  sense 
to  purify,  without  reference  to  the  mode  ?  Can  bapto, 
lingo,  and  wash,  pass  through  similar  transitions,  and 
cannot  baptizo? 

"  But  what  secondary  sense  shall  be  adopted,  cannot  be 
told  a  'priori,  but  must  be  decided  by  the  habits,  manners, 
customs,  and  general  ideas  of  a  people,  and  sometimes 
by  peculiar  usages  for  which  no  reason  can  be  given.  For 
example,  no  reason  exists  in  the  nature  of  things,  why 
bapto  rather  than  baptizo  should  pass  from  the  sense  im- 
merse to  the  sense  to  dye,  yet  there  is  evidence  that  it  did. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  could  not  be  certainly  foretold  that 
baptizo  rather  than  bapto  would  pass  to  the  sense  to  eanse 
and  yet  that  it  did  pass  may  still  be  true,  and  if  true,  can 
be  proved  like  any  other  fact."     *     *     * 

4*  Circumstances  did  exist  tending  to  produce  such  a 
transfer  of  meaning  in  baptizo,  and  therefore,  there  is  a 
strong  probability  that  it  was  made.  As  it  regards  bapto 
and  lingo,  we  have  no  proof  that  any  peculiar  cause  existed 
tending  to  such  a  change  of  meaning  as  they  are  confessed 
to  have  Undergone.  But  as  it  regards  baptizo,  such  a  ten- 
dency can  be  proved  to  have  existed  in  the  manners  and 


§    12  PHILOLOGICAL     DEFINITION.  /5 

customs  of  the  Jews,  for  though  no  immersions  of  the 
persons  were  eo joined  in  the  Mosaic  ritual,  hut  simply 
washings  of  the  body,  or  flesh,  in  any  way,  yet  there  can 
he  no  doubt  that  immersions  and  bathings  were  in  daily 
use  —  and  these,  as  well  as  all  their  other  washings,  were 
solely  for  the  sake  of  purity  and  held  up  this  idea  daily 
before  the  mind. 

"Hence,  when  after  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  the 
Greek  language  began  to  be  spoken  by  the  Jews,  it  encoun- 
tered a  tendency  of  the  same  kind  as  that  which  had 
already  changed  the  meaning  of  bapto  to  color  or  dye  ; 
but  far  more  definite,  powerful,  and  all  pervading  ;  for  the 
practice  of  immersing  to  color  was  limited  to  a  few, 
but  the  practice  of  bathing  or  immersing  to  purify,  was 
common  to  a  whole  nation.  Indeed,  the  idea  of  purifica- 
tion from  uncleanness  pervades  their  whole  ritual  in  num- 
berless cases,  and  must  have  been  perfectly  familiar  to  the 
mind  of  every  one."  Abridged  from  Beecher,  pp.  11-19. 
See  sec.  4. 


THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Import  of  the  Word  Baptizo  —  The  Scripture 
Idea  of  Baptism. 

Having  now  brought  the  philological  argument  and 
definition  to  a  close,  I  most  gladly  dismiss  it ;  for, 
although  the  subject  is  both  important  and  interesting  to 
the  more  advanced  student  of  theology,  I  fear  it  has  been 
not  only  dry  and  tedious,  but  somewhat  perplexing  to 
plain  readers,  for  whom  the  work  is  chiefly  designed.  I 
am  pleased,  therefore,  to  take  up  the  Biblical  argument, 
and  examine  the  scriptural  idea  of  baptism  ; — the  definition 
given  by  Prophets,  Evangelists,  and  Apostles,  and  see 
how  far  it  corresponds  with  that  given  by  the  lexicogra- 
phers and  classical  writers  ;  and  I  flatter  myself  that 
the  task  will  be  a  pleasing  one,  and  the  result  altogether 
satisfactory. 

The  design  of  this  chapter  is  not  only  to  ascertain  the 
scriptural  idea  of  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  and  definition 
of  the  word  baptizo  by  which  it  is  indicated,  but  at  the 
same  time  to  obtain,  as  far  as  possible,  a  clue  to  the  mode 
of  baptism.  For,  while  it  is  a  conceded  fact,  that  the 
commission  given  by  the  Saviour  is  not  a  commission  to 
immerse,  or  sprinkle,  but  simply  a  commission  to  baptize 
or  purify  the  nations,  leaving  the  performance  open  as  to 
mode  ;  still  it  is  strongly  urged,  that  the  mode  of  baptism 
is  clearly  indicated  in  the  scriptures  of  divine  truth. 


§   13  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  77 

And  here  it  becomes  necessary  to  remark,  that  the  word 
katharizo  or  kathairo  (to  purify)  is  the  term  which  is 
invariably  employed  in  the  Septuagint,  to  denote  the 
ritual  purification  of  the  Jews,  and  is  a  perfect  synonym 
of  the  word  baptizo,  and  was  constantly  used  interchang- 
ably  with  it,  by  the  early  fathers,  and  in  some  instances, 
by  the  Saviour  himself. 

§  13.  Sacrificial  Sense  of  Baptizo. 

"Baptizo  and  katharizo  are  so  similarly  used  in  con- 
nection with  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  as  decidedly  to  favor 
the  idea  that  they  are  in  a  religious  sense  synonymous. 
The  purification  effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit  is  of  two 
kinds  :  1.  A  purification  from  spiritual  defilement;  2.  A 
deliverance  from  the  guilt  of  sin,  i.  e.  liability  to  be 
punished,  and  from  a  sense  of  guilt,  through  the  atonement. 
It  is  through  the  atonement  that  pardon  is  given ;  and 
through  the  Holy  Spirit,  conviction  of  sin  is  produced  ; 
and  by  Him,  also,  a  sense  of  guilt  is  taken  away  in  view 
of  the  atonement  —  and  in  this  sense  He  is  said  to  cleanse 
from  sin  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  This  kind  of  purifica- 
tion may  be  called  legal,  as  it  relates  to  guilt,  forgiveness, 
and  atonement.  The  other  kind  of  purification  may  be 
called  moral,  inasmuch  as  it  removes  the  unholy  and  im- 
pure feelings  and  habits  of  the  mind,  and  produces  in  their 
place  those  that  are  holy  and  pure.  Both  kinds  of  jmri- 
fication  are  expressed  by  the  same  word  katharizo.  Its 
use  to  denote  legal  purification  or  expiation  is  very  exten- 
sive. It  denotes  1.  To  make  atonement.  As  in  Ex.  xxix, 
37,  and  xxx,  10,  "Tho*shalt  make  atonement  for  the 
altar,"  "Aaron  shall  make  atonement;  Sept.  katharizo. " 
2.  To  forgive,  Ex.  xx,  7,  "The  Lord  will  not  hold  him 
guiltless  (or  kathariei)  that  taketh  his  name  in  vain." 
Ex.  xxiv,  7,   "That  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty." 


78  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §   13 

Dent,  v,  11  —  Idem.  In  these  and  .similar  cases  the  Greek 
katharizo  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  word  to  forgive,  to 
absolve  from  punishment,  and  is  used  in  a  sense  strictly 
legal,  and  does  not  refer  to  moral  purity  at  all.  So  in 
1  John  i,  7,  "The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  His  Son  cleans 
eth  us  from  all  sin;"  and  verse  9,  "He  is  faithful  and 
just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  un- 
righteousness." In  these  cases  the  idea  of  atonement  and 
forgiveness  by  it,  are  involved  in  katharizo,  and  in  Heb. 
the  blood  of  Christ  is  said  to  purge  the  conscience  from 
dead  works,  implying  a  deliverance  from  a  sense  of  guilt 
and  a  sense  of  pardoned  sin.  Katharizo  is  here  used  ; 
hence  an  atonement  is  called  katharismos  in  Heb.  i,  3. 
"When  He  had  by  Himself  purged  (katharismon)  our 
sins,  He  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  the  majesty  on 
high."  In  this  case  the  atonement,  (katharismos,)  was 
made  first,  and  then  applied  to  cleanse  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  Among  the  Jews  this  kind  of  purification  was  indi- 
cated by  its  appropriate  external  forms,  of  which  the 
sprinkling  of  blood  was  the  most  common  —  if  not  the 
only  one.  Besides  this,  as  all  know,  katharizo  is  used 
abundantly  to  denote  moral  purification  or  its  emblem, 
ceremonial  purification — of  which  no  examples  are  needed. 
Hence  to  a  Jew  it  was  natural  to  apply  to  a  rite  symbol- 
izing the  forgiveness  of  sins  the  term  katharismos,  or 
some  synonymous  word. 

"Between  immersion,  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  no 
such  associations  had  ever  been  established.  For  all  the 
remissions  of  sin  under  the  old  ritual,  were  by  blood,  and 
hence  Paul,  Heb.  ix,  19-23,  after  speaking  of  the  sprink- 
ling of  blood  upon  the  people  ami  the  book,  the  tabernacle 
and  the  vessels,  says,  "Almost  all  things  are  by  the  law 
purified  by  blood,  and  without  shedding  of  blood  there  is  no 
remission  of  sins."  Here  a  rite  denoting  remission  of 
sins,  by  sprinkling  of  blood,  is  spoken  of  as  a  katharismos, 


/ 


§    13  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM-  7$ 

a  purification  But  under  the  law,  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
was  never  symbolized  by  an  immersion  of  the  person  for- 
given. Hence,  if  any  word  is  used  to  denote  a  rite  sym- 
bolical of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  in  the  same  way  as 
katharismos,  it  is  probably  used  in  the  same  sense.  But 
baptize  and  its  derivatives  are  so  used,  Mark  i,  4,  '/John 
preached  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  forgiveness  of 
sin*," — so  in  Luke  iii,  3  ;  also,  Acts  ii,  38,  "  Repent  and 
be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghost" 

"  Here  is  a  rite  symbolizing  the  forgiveness  of  sins.. 
The  common  name  for  rites  of  this  import  is  katharismos. 
Baptizo  is  used  to  denote  the  rite  Immersion  had  never 
previously  been  used  for  any  suck  purpose.  How  rea- 
sonable then,  the  conclusion  that  baptismos  has  the  same 
sense  as  the  word,  whose  familiar  office  it  performs.  But 
though  baptism  in  these  places  relates  chiefly  to  legal  puri- 
fication, in  others  it  relates  as  clearly  to  moral  purification, 
and  in  this  respect  also  corresponds  with  katharizo, 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  includes  both  kinds  of  purification, 
legal  and  moral. 

■"  To  sum  up  all  in  a  few  words,  baptizo  is  used  in 
connection  with  both  kiwis  of  purification,  legal  and 
moral,  of  the  conscience  and  the  heart  ;  and  the  language 
most  commonly  applied  to  the  first  is  kathairo  or  katha- 
rizo—  and  this  is  always  in  the  ritual  symbolized  by 
sprinkling  and  by  blood.  Hence,  as  baptizo  is  used  in 
reference  to  the  same  kind  of  purification,  with  katharizo, 
and  as  k  stands  in  the  same  relations  with  it  to  the  for- 
giveness of  sins,  it  is  highly  probable  that  it  has  the  same 
sense.  By  giving  it  a  meaning  so  extensive  m  purifv,  it 
is  adapted  to  fulfill  all  its  relations.  By  confining  it  to 
a  meaning  so  limited  as  to  immerse,  it  is  unfitted  for  at. 
least  one-half  the  relations  in  which  ii  stands. "  —  Beecher. 
pages  28,  ?A, 


% 


SM  IMPORT    OF    BAPTIZO\  §    14 


§  14,  Old  Testament  Prophecies  — Expectation  that 
the  Messiah  would  Purify  or  Baptise. 

There  are  a  number  of  Old  Testament  prophecies  which 
contain  the  scripture  idea  of  baptism,  and  doubtless 
anticipated  that  ordinance  fn  all  its  design  and  significance 
under  the  gospel.  The  doctrine  of  atonement  and  a  legal 
purification  connected  with  it,  pervades  the  whole  typical 
economy.,  which  looked  forward  to  better  things,  and  pre- 
sented to  the  eye  of  faith  a  still  greater  purification  to  be 
effected  by  the  promised  Messiah.  On  this  ground  alone 
it  is,  that  we  are  able  to  account  for  the  existing  expecta- 
tion that  the  Messiah  would  baptize.  (John  i,  25.)  That 
the  Messiah  should  purify  is  often  and  clearly  predicted. 

I.  "But  especially  is  this  foretold  in  that  last  and 
prominent  prophecy  of  Malachi  iii,  1-3,  which  was 
designed  to  fill  the  eye  and  the  mind  of  the  nation,  until 
he  came  :  'Behold,  I  will  send  my  messenger,  and  be 
shall  prepare  the  way  before  me:  but  who  may  abide  the 
day  of  his  coming  ?  and  who  shall  stand  when  he  appear- 
eth  ?  For  he  is  Tike  a  refiner's  fire,  and  like  fuller's  soap. 
And  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner  and'  purifier  of  silver ;  and  he 
shall  purify  the  sons  of  Leri,  and  purge  them  as  gold  anel 
silver/ 

"  He  is  here  presented  to  the  mind  in  all  his  majesty 
and  power,  but  amid  all  other  ideas  that  of  purifying  is 
most  prominent.  He  was  above  all  things  to  purify  anil 
purge,  and  that  with  power  so  great,  that  few  could  endure 
the  fiery  day.  '  Who  may  abide  the  day  of  his  coming, 
and  who  shall  stand  when  he  appcareth  ?  r  *' 

Continues  Pres.  Beecher:  "Bnppose  now  the  word 
baptizo  to  mean  as  I  affirm,  —  the  whole  nation  are 
expecting  the  predicted  Purifier -  all  at  once  the  news 
goes  forth  that  a  great  Purifier  has  appeared,,  and  tkat  sill 


§   14  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  81 

men  flock  to  him  and  are  purified  in  the  Jordan.  How 
natural  the  influence  !  The  great  Purifier  so  long-  foretold, 
has  at  last  appeared,  and  how  natural  the  embassy  of  the 
priests  and  Levites,  to  inquire  who  art  thou  ?  and  when 
he  denied  that  he  was  the  Messiah,  or  either  of  his  ex- 
pected attendants,  how  natural  the  inquiry,  why  purifiest 
thou  then  ?  It  is  his  work  —  of  him  it  is  foretold,  why 
dost  thou  intrude  into  his  place  and  do  his  work  ? 

"  In  view  of  these  facts,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  believe 
most  fully,  that  the  idea  which  came  up  before  the  mind 
of  the  Jews  when  the  word  Joannes  ho  Baptisies  (John 
the  Baptist)  were  used,  were  not  John  the  Immerscr,  nor 
John  the  Dipper,  but  John  the  Purifier,  a  name  peculiarly 
appropriate  to  him  as  a  reformer  —  as  puritan  was  to  our 
ancestors,  and  for  the  same  reason. 

"This  view  has  to  my  own  mind  the  self-evidencing 
power  of  truth,  for  there  is  not  the  slightest  presumption 
against  it ;  all  probable  evidence  is  in  its  favor  ;  and  it 
explains  and  harmonizes  the  facts  of  the  case  as  no  other 
view  does.  Indeed,  I  can  never  read  the  account  of  John's 
baptism,  and  his  various  replies,  without  feeling  that  this 
passage  from  Malachi  gives  color  to  them  all.  —  Pres. 
Beecher,  pages  25,  26. 

2.  There  is  a  similar  text  in  Isaiah  iv,  4,  in  which  a 
great  washing  or  purification  is  also  predicted,  to  be  ef- 
fected by  the  spirit  of  judgment  and  by  the  spirit  of  burning. 
This  passage  is  viewed  as  strictly  in  keeping  with  the 
preceding  one,  and  as  also  having  its  accomplishment  in 
the  preaching  of  John  and  of  Christ,  and  especially  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  This  was  the  view  of  the  early 
Fathers.     I  give  that  of  Basil  as  a  specimen  of  the  whole  : 

"The  Lord  shall  wash  away  the  filth  of  the  sons  and 
daughters  of  Zion,  and  shall  purge  the  blood  of  Jerusalem 
from  the  midst  of  them,  by  the  spirit  of  judgment,  and  by 
the  spirit  of  burning."     On  this  he  remarks  :  "Plainly 


82  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §    14 

the  word  foretells  the  same  things  concerning  the  Lord  by 
John,  who  says  that  lie  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy- 
Spirit  and  fire";  but,  concerning  himself,  he  says  :  '  I 
indeed  baptize  you  with  water  unto  repentance.'  In  one 
series  of  expressions,  in  his  Greek,  the  words  are  pluno 
and  ekkatharizo —  in  the  other  baptizo.  Hence  Basil 
used  the  words  katharizo  and  baptizo  interchangeably. 

"  The  .Fathers  in  commenting  on  those  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament,  in  which  it  is  predicted  that  the  Messiah 
should  purify,  do  regard  them  as  predictions  that  he 
should  baptize,  and  state  explicitly  that  the  words  baptizo 
and  katharizo  mean  the  same  thing.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, it  is  said  concerning  the  Messiah  ekplunei  and 
ekkatharei.  In  the  New,  John  says,  baptisei,  and  Basil 
says  they  mean  the  same  thing  ;  and  then  defines  baptisma 
as  meaning  katharismos." 

"  In  regarding  Isa.  iv,  4,  as  a  prophecy  of  baptism, 
Origen,  Eusebius,  Basil,  Jerome,  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
and  Theodoret,  all  coincide.  And  just  as  clearly  do 
Theodoret  and  Cyril  regard  Mai.  iii,  3,  as  a  prophecy  of 
baptism  ;  and  the  same  is  true  of  other  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament,  in  which  it  is  foretold  that  the  Messiah 
shall  purify." 

"  Inasmuch  then,  as  it  was  foretold  that  the  Messiah 
should  purify,  and  inasmuch  as  purify  and  baptize  are,  by 
the  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  synonomous,  it  was  of  course 
foretold  that  the  Messiah  should  baptize.  And  predictions 
that  he  should  baptize,  would  of  course  awaken  an 
expectation  that  he  would  baptize.  Hence  this  expecta- 
tion is  accounted  for,  as  stated  before. 

"lin  what  manner  he  should  baptize  is  not  foretold,  and 
no  doubt  all  these  predictions  had  a  primary  reference  to 
spiritual  purification,  and  would  have  been  fulfilled  had 
no  external  rite  of  purification  been  ordained.  But  so 
soon   as   a  rite  of    purification    was    established  by  the 


§    14  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  83 

forerunner  of  the  Messiah,  it  would  at  once  call  up  to  the 
minds  of  all,  die  great  Purifier,  so  long  foretold,  so  long 
expected,  and  raise  the  inquiry,  Is  John  he  ?  If  not,  why 
does  he  purify  ?  And  when  the  attention  was  thus 
aroused,  it  would  of  course  lead  John  to  unfold  to  the 
people  the  nature  of  that  spiritual  purification,  of  which 
his  purification  by  water  was  but  a  type. 

"  What  struck  my  mind  was  this  :  The  language  of  the 
Xew  Testament,  as  to  baptism  by  the  Messiah,  is  exactly 
such  as  is  used  in  the  Old  Testament,  with  reference  to 
purification  by  the  Messiah.  In  the  old  Testament,  a 
purification  by  the  Spirit  and  by  fire  was  spoken  of;  in 
the  Xew,  a  baptism  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  by  fire.  An 
immersion  in  the  Holy  Spirit  and  fire  were  manifestly 
absurd  ;  hence  I  could  not  resist  the  conviction  that  the 
Old  Testament  and  Xew  Testament  modes  of  expression 
were  equivalent."  —  Beecher,page  216. 

3.  There  are  several  other  passages  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment that  are  viewed  as  having  at  least  some  reference  to 
the  scriptural  idea  of  baptism  in  anticipation  of  the  gospel, 
and  were  so  viewed  by  the  Fathers.  Such,  for  instance, 
as  the  following  :  "  Wash  you,  make  you  clean."  Isa.  i, 
16.  "  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean  ;  from  all  your  filthiness  and  from  all  your 
idols  will  I  cleanse  you."  Eze.  xxxvi,  25.  "  Purge  me 
with  hyssop  and  I  shall  be  clean ;  wash  me,  and  I  shall 
be  whiter  than  snow."  Psa.  li,  7.  In  these  passages,  the 
prominent  idea  is  that  of  a  spiritual  cleansing  or  purifica- 
tion, brought  to  view  under  the  idea  of  a  washing  or 
cleansing,  by  the  application  of  a  purifying  element.  The 
language,  it  is  true,  is  symbolical,  and  lias  a  reference  to 
the  Levitical  purifications  ;  but,  that  it  also  has  a  direct 
reference  to  the  purification  of  the  heart,  effected  by  the 
Spirit  of  Grod,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  both  in  Eze- 
kiel  and  the  fifty-first  Psalm,  it  is  coupled  with  a  new  or 


84  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §    15 

clean  heart,  and  with  a  new  or  right  spirit.  And  it  cor- 
responds precisely  with  the  New  Testament  doctrine  — 
"  the  washing  of  regeneration  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  " 

In  conclusion,  in  these  passages  too,  we  have  the 
scriptural  idea  of  baptism  brought  to  view,  as  symbolically 
set  forth  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  illustrated  and  ex- 
plained in  the  New,  in  the  preaching  of  John  and  in  the 
writings  of  the  early  Fathers.  Here  is  evidence  clear  and 
conclusive,  that  the  word  katharizo  —  of  the  Beptnagint, 
and  baptizo  of  the  Xew  Testament,  are  synonomous 
terms:  and  hence  katharizo  contains  the  whole  idea  of 
baptizo,  as  a  religious  rite,  and  of  course  well  defines  it. 

§  15.  The  New  Testament  Definition  of  Baptism. 

1.  "There  were  various  rituals  or  prescribed  observ- 
ances under  the  law  of  Moses,  in  which  both  water  and 
blood  were  used  as  emblems  of  purification  or  cleansing  ; 
which  the  Apostle  denominates  (Heb.  ix,  10,)  'divers 
washings.'  In  the  original  it  is  diaphorois  baptismois 
(divers  baptism-.) 

"The  reader  should  here  possess  himself  of  definite 
impressions,  as  to  the  true  nature  of  these  purifications  or 
baptisms.  They  were  not  literal  or  actual  washings  of  the 
body,  which  were  prescribed  in  these  rites,  but  only  sym- 
bolical cleansings.  They  were  external  ceremonies  or 
observances,  in  which  water  or  blood  was  applied  to 
persons  or  things,  as  a  symbol,  emblem,  or  sign  of  their 
purification,  as  consecrated  to  God,  and  accepted  of  him. 
There  was  no  necessity,  therefore,  that  the  water  or  puri- 
fying element,  should  be  used  in  a  sufficient  quantity  to 
accomplish  an  actual  washing.  Any  quantity,  applied  in 
any  mode,  might  serve  as  a  symbol  of  cleansing,  just  as 
the  smallest   quantities  of  bread  and  wine,  broken  and 


g   15  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  85 

poured  out,  in  whatever  mode,  are  appropriate  symbols 
of  the  broken  body  and  shed  blood  of  Christ,  in  the 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

"This  is  a  principle  well  settled  in  the  scriptures,  as 
acceptable  to  God  in  the  worship  which  he  requires  of 
men.  A  purification  thus  professed  and  symbolized  is  a 
part  of  the  scripture  language  of  worship,  a  seal  of  cove- 
nant engagements  and  promises.  So  among  the  Jews, 
when  the  body  of  a  murdered  man  had  been  found,  and 
the  murderer  had  eluded  discovery,  the  elders  of  the  city 
nearest  to  the  place  where  the  body  was  found,  were 
required  to  wash  their  hands  —  not  their  whole  bodies  — 
over  a  slain  heifer,  as  a  public  pledge  or  protestation  of 
their  entire  innocence  in  this  matter.  Deut.  xxi,  1-19. 
And  David  says,  Psa.  xxvi,  6  :  '  I  will  wash  my  hands 
in  innocency.'  Here  the  washing  of  the  hands  was  in- 
tended as  an  emblem  of  the  innocency  of  the  whole  man. 
"  So  Pilate  '  took  water  and  washed  his  hands,  saying,  I 
am  innocent  of  the  blood  of  this  just  person.'  Matt, 
xxviii,  24.  And  our  Saviour  said  to  Peter,  '  He  that  is 
washed  needeth  not  save  to  wash  his  feet,  and  is  clean 
every  whit.'     John  xiii,  10. 

"  The  true  meaning  therefore  of  the  '  divers  baptisms' 
under  the  law,  and  of  Christian  baptism  —  the  main  idea, 
the  thing  commanded  —  is  purification  or  consecration. 
This  is  the  thing  signified  by  the  external  symbol ;  and 
the  mode  of  applying  the  symbol  is  comparatively  unim- 
portant. This  is  especially  the  case  in  Christian  baptism. 
Hence  no  particular  mode  is  prescribed  in  our  Saviour's 
command  to  his  disciples  to  baptize  ;  and  the  only  thing 
upon  which  the  mind  can  fasten,  in  this  command,  as  of 
Divine  obligation,  is  the  thing  signified  by  the  word 
baptize,  which  is  to  purify,  or  to  consecrate,  by  the  appli- 
cation of  water  in  some  mode.  And  not  only  is  no 
precise  mode  of  applying  the  symbol  prescribed  in  the 


8G  IJIPORT    OF    BAPTIZO.  §   15 

command,  but  no  mode  is  spoken  of  afterwards,  as  bind" 
iag,  or  as  commanded.  The  thing  called  baptism,  or 
purification,  is  commanded,  but  nothing  said  of  the  mode  ; 
and  I  maintain  that  the  mode  is  not  indicated  by  the 
names  baptism  and  purification.  These  names  are  used 
to  designate  the  thing  itself,  which  is  symbolical  cleansing 
or  consecration.  And  these  names,  in  this  respect,  are 
synonomous.  They  mean  the  same  thing.  Both  in  the 
New  Testament  and  in  the  writings  of  the  Christian 
Fathers,  they  are  used  interchangably,  the  one  for  the 
otber."  —  Dr.  Peters,  pp.  36-39. 

2.  "To  obtain  a  definition  of  baptizo  which  shall  refer 
to  the  intention  of  the  ordinance  and  the  import  of  the 
term — a  definition  which  shall  express  the  substance  of 
baptism,  omitting  all  reference  to  the  circumstances  — 
we  have  the  soundest  warrant  and  the  most  explicit  exam- 
ples in  the  word  of  God.  In  John  iii,  25,  26,  katharismos 
is  used  as  synonomous  with  baptismos  ;  and  then  the 
common  use  of  words,  as  regards  the  religious  rite,  is 
clearly  decided. 

"The  facts  are  these  :  John  and  Jesus  were  both  bap- 
tizing, the  one,  in  Judea,  the  other  in  Enon  near  to  Salim, 
and  in  circumstances  that  there  would  seem  to  us  a  rivalry 
between  the  two.  And  on  this  point  a  dispute  arose 
between  the  disciples  of  John  and  the  Jews,  (or  a  Jew, 
as  many  copies  read)  about  purifying.  To  settle  the 
dispute,  they  refer  it  to  John,  under  the  shape  of  a  ques- 
tion about  baptizing.  Their  minds  fastened  on  the  sub- 
stance, not  on  the  circumstances.  Baptism  with  them 
was  not  an  immersion,  nor  a  dipping,  nor  a  sprinkling , 
nor  a  pouring  ;  but  a  purifying  ;  and  they  state  the  ques- 
tion to  John  as  a  question  about  baptizing.  In  their  view, 
the  words  baptize  and  purify  are  so  far  synonomous,  that 
in  a  debate  about  purifying,  they  may  use  either  the  one 
or  the  other,  or  them  both  indifferently. 


15  SCRIPTURE  IDEA  OF  BAPTISM.  87 

u  The  .argument  from  the  facts  is  this  :  The  dispute  in 
question  was  plainly  a  specific  dispute  concerning  baptism, 
as  practiced  by  Jesus  and  John,  and  not  a  general  dispute 
on  the  subject  of  purification  at  large  ;  so  that  a  question 
about  baptismon  (baptizing)  is  the  true  sense  ;  and  if  it 
had  been  so  written,  the  passage  would  have  been  regarded 
by  all  as  perfectly  plain.  But  instead  of  baptismon,  John 
has  used  katharismon,  because  the  sense  is  entirely  the 
same.  In  other  words,  'a  question  concerning  baptism,' 
and  '  a  question  concerning  purification,'  were  at  that 
time  modes  of  expression  perfectly  equivalent ;  that  is, 
baptismos  is  a  synonym  of  katharismos.  Assigning  this 
meaning  makes  the  passage  natural,  lucid,  and  simple  ;  to 
assume  a  general  debate  on  purification  at  large,  renders 
it  forced  and  obscure,  and  the  reply  of  John  totally 
irrelevant. 

"  Xo  word  is  more  entirely  independent  of  all  reference 
to  modes  and  forms  than  katharizo,  and  nothing  can 
more  clearly  show  that  baptizo  has  dropped  all  reference 
to  form,  and  assumed  the  sense  to  purify  or  cleanse  than 
making  it  a  synonym  of  katharizo.  And  the  evidence  is 
the  more  striking,  as  it  is  incidental  and  undesigned.  It 
is  as  if  we  could  stand  on  the  plain  of  Judea,  and  hear 
them  interchange  baptismos  and  katharismos  as  synono- 
mous  words."  *  — Abridged  from  Beecher,  pages  23,  24. 

"  This  is  the  view  not  only  of  the  Fathers,  as  Beecher 
remarks,  page  221,  but  it  is  also  the  most  natural  results 
of  modern  criticism.  Schleusner,  Wahl,  Vater,  Rosen- 
umller,  De  Wette,  Bretschneider,  Kuinoel,  all  agree  that 

*  "  '  The  following  translation  of  the  passage  will  present  the  true 
sense  and  the  argument  at  once  to  the  eye  : 

"  After  those  things  came  Jesus  and  his  disciples  into  the  land  of 
Judea,  and  then  he  tarried  with  them,  and  2>urified.  And  John  was  also 
pkrifying  in  Enon,  near  to  Salim,  because  there  was  much  water  there, 
and  they  came  to  him  and  were  purified.  Therefore,  there  arose  a 
question  concerning  purification  between  some  of  the  disciples  of  John 


88  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §    15 

baptism  was  the  subject  of  the  question  ;  andRosenmuller, 
Vater,  Kuinoel,  and  Schleusner,  give  baptism  as  the 
translation  of  katharismos,  and  Deoderlin  takes  the  same 
view." 

3.  Again.  In  Mark  vii,  4,  8,  katharizo  is  the  natural 
and  obvious  sense  of  baptizo,  and  katharismos  of  baptis- 
mos.  This  sense  fulfills  perfectly  all  the  exigencies  of 
these  passages. 

"Here  is  a  talk  about  baptizing,  and  it  is  justly  ad- 
mitted by  the  more  intelligent  Baptist  writers  themselves, 
that,  whatever  was  done,  was  done  by  the  use  of  the 
'  water-pots.'  But  John  ii,  6,  represents  the  water-pots 
as  set  '  after  the  manner  of  the  purifying  of  the  Jews.' 
They  always  washed  their  hands  before  meals,  and  when 
they  returned  from  the  market,  they,  in  addition  to  this, 
purify  themselves,  (as  the  nature  of  the  case  may  require,) 
before  they  eat.  These  ablutions  were  performed  in  run- 
ning water,  and  by  pouring,  as  the  practice  still  prevails 
in  the  East. 

"  Here,  too,  baptism  is  not  an  immersion  in  fact,  much 
less  in  the  idea.  But  above  all,  the  immersion  of  either 
the  table  on  which  they  eat,  or  the  couches  on  which  they 
reclined  at  meals,  is  out  of  the  question.  The  idea  of 
baptism  here  is  not  a  mere  mode  of  applying  water  — 
certainly  not  the  mode  of  immersion  —  but  a  purifying." 
—  Dr.  Peters. 

4.  Another  example  of  this  is  found  in  Luke  xi,  38,  41. 
"  We  are  here  told  that  a  certain  Pharisee  invited  the 
Saviour  to  dine  with  him,  and  he  went  in  and  sat  down 
to  meat.     And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he  marveled 

and  the  Jews,  and  they  came  unto  John,  and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi,  he 
that  was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou  bearest  witness,  be- 
hold the  same  purijieth,  and  all  men  come  to  him.'  As  if  Christ  was 
improperly  drawing  men  away  from  John's  purification.  In  reply  to  all 
this,  John  clearly  avows  the  superiority  of  Christ  to  himself,  and  justified 
his  cause." 


g   15  SCRIPTURE   IDEA    OF    BAPTISM,  89 

that  he  had  not  washed  (ebaptisthe,  baptized)  before  din* 
ner."  And  the  Lord  said  unto  him,  "  Now  do  you 
Pharisees  make  clean  (katharizete,  purify)  the  outside  of 
the  cup  and  the  platter,"  etc.  But  rather  give  alms,  * 
*  *  and  behold  all  things  are  clean,  (kathara,  pure) 
unto  you."  Now  the  subject  of  the  Pharisee's  wonder 
was  the  fact  of  the  Saviour's  not  baptizing  before  dinner. 
But  the  Saviour  in  shaping  his  reply  to  meet  the  point  of 
the  Pharisee's  objection,  addressed  him  on  the  practice  of 
purifying  the  outward  man,  and  of  being  over  exact  in 
mere  legal  superstitious  distinctions  between  dean  and 
unclean  things,  in  a  ceremonial  sense,  and  advances  the 
principle  elsewhere  expressed,  that  "to  the  pure,"  — 
morally-— "all  thing*  are  pure."  Does  not  the  obvious 
and  natural  force  of  this  whole  passage  go  to  show,  that 
baptizo  is  here  used  in  the  sense  of  katharizo,  to  purify.' * 
> — Dr.  Peters,  pages  39,  40. 

5.  There  are  several  other  passages  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  might  be  adduced  in  evidence  of  the  scriptural 
meaning  of  the  word  Baptizo,  were  it  necessary  ;  for 
instance,  the  class  of  texts  in  which  the  word  wash  *  is 
used  in  reference  to  baptism,  either  material  or  spiritual. 
As  "  Arise  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins, 
calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord,"  Acts  xxii,  16.  "  Unto 
him  that  loved  us,  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own 
blood,"  Rev.  i,  5.  "  These  are  they  which  came  out  of 
great  tribulation,  and  have  washed  their  robes,  and  made 
them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,"  Rev.  vii,  14. 
And  "  According  to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by  the  washing 
of  regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Titus 
iii,  5. 

It  is  almost  needless  to  remark,  that  the  primary  idea 
in  all  these  passages,  is  that  of  a  purification  ;  and  especi- 
ally is  that  idea  clear  and  prominent,  when  the  preposition 

*See  §16,  the  Note. 
8 


DO  IMPORT  OF  BAPTlXu.  §   16 

apo-^-  from  —  is  connected  with  the  verbl  ouo  —  to  wash 
■ —  as  in  the  baptism  of  Paul, —  "  Arise,  and  be  baptized, 
— ^be  purified  — and  apolousai*—  wash  away  - — thy  sins, 
calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord."  And,  "Unto  him 
that  loved  us,  and  lousanti  —  washed  us  apo  •— •  from  — 
our  sins  in  his  own  blood/'  The  conclusion  is  clear  and 
irresistible,  that  in  all  these  passages,  the  substance  of  a 
great  internal  spiritual  purification,  which  is  symbolized 
by  the  external  washing  of  baptism,  filled  the  mind  of  the 
inspired  penman.  There  is  something  incongruous  in  the 
very  idea  of  being  immersed  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb, 
while  there  is  none  at  all  in  that  of  being  'purified —  of 
being  washed  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood.  Hence 
these  texts  afford  strong  collateral  evidence  to  the  fact 
already  established,  that  the  New  Testament  meaning  of 
baptizo,  is  that  of  wash  or  purify* 

§  16.  The  Definition  of  Baptizo* — Apocrypha  and 
josephus. 

*"  In  Sirach  iii,  25,  baptizo  requires  the  sense  katharizo. 
The  passage  is  this  ;  "He  that  is  baptized  from  a  dead 
body,  and  again  toucheth  it,  of  what  profit  to  him  is  his 
cleansing  ?  "  The  allusion  is  to  Num.  xix,  11-13,  where 
the  law  simply  required  washing  or  purifying;  and  the 

*  The  words  with  which  baptizo  is  interchanged,  in  giving  variety  to 
style,  and  preventing  the  too  frequent  repetition  of  the  same  word,  show* 
that  it  is  used  by  the  Fathers  in  the  sense  of  purify.  In  such  inter- 
changes, we  always  expect  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  leading  term  to 
be  retained ;  or  some  one  into  which  it  easily  passes,  and  with  which  it 
has  a  natural  affinity.  The  class  of  words  that  has  an  affinity  to  the  idea 
katharizo,  is  very  large.  In  Greek,  they  are  louo,  (to  wash  ;)  hagiazo>  (to 
consecrate,  purify,  sanctify  :)  hagnizo,  (to  purify  ;)  anagennao,  (to  rege- 
nerate ;)  etc.,  together  with  the  nouns  and  participles  derived  from  them, 
as  loutron,  hagnismos,  etc.  The  class  of  words  which  has  an  affinity  to 
the  idea  immersion  i?  small,  as  it  is  a  mere  external  act."  Beecher, 
p.  70. 


■> 


'lb  SCRYPTUAE    IDEA    OF   UA"i*ttSH.  \)i 


essential   thing  in   that  purification   was   performed  by 
sprinkling." 

"  Here/'  says  Pres.  Beecher,  p.  41,  **I  remark  : 

1.  The  sense,  katharizo,  (purify,)  suits  the  preposition 
ape-  (from) — immerse  does  not.  It  is  natural  to  speak 
of  purifying  or  cleansing./ro?fr,  but  not  of  immersing  from, 
a  dead  body. 

2.  "  No  immersion,  in  the  ease  of  touching  a  dead 
bedy,  was  enjoined,  brit  simply  a  toashing  <f  the  body,  so 
as  to  leave  room  for  various  modes  in  various  circum- 
stances, and  it  is  not  likely  that  this  would  he  spoken  o£ 
as  an  immersion. 

8.  "  The  rite  of  purification  from  a  dead  body  was 
complex,  and  no  import  c-f  the  word  baptize,  but  the  one 
claimed,  is  adapted  to  include  the  whole.  By  far  the  most 
important  part  of  the  rite  was  the  sprinkling  of  the  water, 
in  which  had  been  put  the  ashes  o€  the  heifer.  Concern- 
ing this  rite,  it  is  said,  that  whosoever  shall  not  puriff 
kimself  with  it,  after  touching  a  dead  body,  *  That  soul 
shall  be  cutoff  from  Israel,  because  the  water  of  separation 
was  not  sprinkled  on  him."  -Of  the  washing  no  such 
thing  is  said,  and  Paul,  Heb.  ix,  13,  refers  to  the  sprink- 
ling, as  if  it  included  the  part  of  the  rite  on  which  the 
effect  mainly,  if  not  entirely,  depends.  It  is  the  ashes  of 
a  heifer,  sprinkling  the  unclean,  that  is  spoken  of  as  sanc- 
tifying to  the  purification  of  the  flesh.  Of  course,  the 
writer  could  not  mean  to  exclude  so  essential  a  part  of  the 
rite  as  this,  nay  its  very  essence.  Xor  could  he  call  it  an 
immersion.  It  is  u  sprinkling.  It  can  purify,  but  it 
cannot  immerse.  But  the  sense,  katharizo,  can  include 
both  the  sprinkling  and  the  washing :  for,  taken  together, 
they  purify,  and  this  is  the  complex  result  of  the  whole 
rite,  and  nothing  else.  If  any  object  that  it  is  not  con- 
sistent to  apply  loutro  (washing)  to  a  complex  operation 
like  this,  I  ask  them,  how  then  is  it  consistent  to  apply  it 


02  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §    16 

to  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  is  spoken  of  as  the  blood 
of  sprinkling  ?  And  yet,  we  are  spoken  of  as  washed 
from  our  sins  in  His  own  blood,  where  louo  (wash  )  is- 
used.  The  truth  is,  that  the  sense  of  louo  is  general  too, 
and  denotes  merely  a  washing  or  cleansing,  without 
respect  to  mode.  Besides,  an  actual  washing  is  a  part  of 
the  complex  rite."     Pres.  Beecher,  ^>.  41. 

2.  Again  :  "  The  case  of  Judith  also  sustains  the  same- 
view.  In  Judith  xii,  7,  we  are  told  that  '  she  remained  in 
the  camp  of  Holofernes,  three  days,  and  by  night,  that 
is,  on  each  night  she  went  out  to  the  valley  of  Bethulia, 
and  purified  or  washed  herself.  Septuaymt,  baptized  her- 
self, in  the  camp,  at  the  fountain  of  water." 

"Here  we  learn  that  the  purification  was  performed  in 
the  camp,  and  at  or  near  the  fountain,  not  in  the  fountain, 
and  for  three  nights  in  succession.  The  context  shows 
that  the  object  of  this  baptizing,  or  purifying,  was  to 
remove  a  ceremonial  uncleanness.  She,  without  doubt, 
strictly  obeyed  the  law,  and  did  what  the  law  intended 
that  she  should  do.  But  the  law  in  such  cases  simply 
commanded  washing — Lev.  xv.  The  narrator  does  not 
intend  to  signify  that  she  went  beyond  the  law,  but  that 
she  observed  it :  and  in  his  view,  wash  is  synonymous  with 
baptize,  in  denoting  a  religious  ordinance  —  a  ceremonial 
purification."     Br.  Hall,  p.  114. 

3.  "  So,  too,  the  account  given  by  Josephus  of  the 
baptism  of  John,  Antiq.  B.  18,  ch.  5,  sec.  2,  presents  the 
same  train  of  thought  to  the  mind.  Instead  of  the  awk- 
ward translation  of  ^Yhiston,  I  prefer  to  give  a  free 
statement  of  the  obvious  sense,  and  to  quote  the  original 
where  critical  exactness  is  needed. 

"  John,  he  says,  informed  the  Jews,  that  before  they 
could  be  baptized,  they  must  commence  and  profess  the 
practice  of  piety  towards  God,  and  justice  towards  each 
other, — -and  that  their  baptism  would  be  acceptable  to 


g    17  SCRIPTURE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  $3 

God,  if  they  did  not  rely  upon  it,  as  a  means  of  putting 
away  a  part  of  their  sins,  but  used  it  merely  as  a  means 
of  purifying  the  body,  to  indicate  that  the  soul  had  beea 
previously  thorughly  purified  by  righteousness. 

"To  denote  baptism,  he  uses  the  word  baptizo,  and  to 
denote  its  import,  he  uses  the  word  katharizo.  Now  here, 
I  remark,  that  there  was  nothing  to  cause  Josephus  or  any 
other  Jew  to  think  of  the  mode,  or  to  attach  any  impor- 
tance to  it.  No  idea  of  a  fancied  reference  in  the  rite,  to 
the  death  of  Christ,  could  bias  his  mind  towards  the 
sense  immerse.  To  him,  it  is  plain,  that  it  meant  nothing 
but  the  '  purifying  the  body,  to  indicate  that  the  mind  had 
been  previously  thoroughly  purified  by  righteousness ;  ' 
and  he  speaks  just  as  he  would,  if  these  ideas  had  been 
suggested  by  the  name  of  the  rite ;  in  other  words,  just  as 
he  would  if  kartharsis  had  stood  in  the  place  of  baptisis." 
Beecher,  p.  46, 


§  17.  Definition  of  Baptizo  and  Baptisma,  as  given  by 
the  Fathers. 


Says  Pres.  Beecher,  pp.  47,  48,  "I  shall  now  proceed 
to  show  that  the  truth  of  this  view  is  also  to  be  found  in 
the  writings  of  the  Fathers  ;  and  that  the  sense  to  purify 
is  established  by  direct  definition  of  the  Fathers,  and  of 
Greek  lexicographers,  given  in  a  manner  most  explicit  and 
unambiguous. 

"  1  appeal  to  them,  not  because  I  think  that  their 
opinions,  on  questions  of  interpretation,  or  sacred  phi- 
lology, are  of  much  weight,  for  it  is  well  known  to  all, 
that  either  their  attainments  in  biblical  literature  were 
small,  or  that  their  principles  of  philology  were  to  a  great 
extent  fluctuating  or  unsound.  Nor  do  I  appeal  to  them 
because  I  deem  their  theological  opinions  of  peculiar 
weight.     They  deserve,  indeed,  a  respectful  attention,  and 


*)'  IMPORT  OF   BAPTIZO.  §   17 

are  of  great  use  in  investigating  the  history  of  opinions. 
Moreover,  they  often  furnish  rich  and  valuable  materials 
for  thought.  But  nothing  can  be  more  desperate  than  the 
attempt  to  make  a  regular  and  harmonious  system  of  truth 
from  their  works.  And  it  may  be  added,  that  they,  most 
of  them  being  native  born  Greeks,  and  living  in  the  New 
Testament  age,  must  have  well  understood  their  mother 
tongue,  and  both  the  classical  and  the  sacred  meaning  of 
the  terms  in  question. 

"My  position  then  is  this:  if  we  admit  that  in  the 
days  of  Christ,  katharizo  was  the  import  of  baptizo, 
taking  all  the  texts  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  the 
word  occurs,  and  the  idea  connected  with  the  rite,  and 
looking  at  the  laws  of  the  mind  and  the  natural  course  o£ 
thought,  we  shall  find  that  no  view  can  so  well  explain 
the  ttsus  hquendi  (common  use  of  words)  of  the  Fathers 
and  the  opinions  entertained  by  them,  and  by  their  oppo- 
nents, of  the  import  and  effects  of  the  rite." 

The  following  definitions  are  abridged  from  those  of 
Pres.  Beecher,  pp.  170-174,  by  whom  they  were  translated 
from  the  Christian  Fathers.  They  are  but  a  few  out  of 
more  than  one  hundred  quotations  made  by  him. 

1.  He  says,  "  On  this  point,  I  shall  first  quote  Basil. 
He  is  commenting  on  Isa.  iv,  4,  '  The  Lord  shall  wash 
away  the  filth  of  the  sons  and  the  daughters  of  Zion,  and 
and  shall  purge  the  blood  of  Jerusalem  from  the  midst  of 
them  by  the  spirit  of  judgment,  and  by  the  spirit  of  burn- 
ing.' On  this  he  remarks,  '  Plainly  the  word  foretells  the 
same  things  concerning  the  Lord,  by  John,  who  says, 
that  He  shall  baptize  you  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  fire  ;  but 
concerning  himself,  he  says,  I,  indeed  baptize  you  with 
water  unto  repentance.'  In  one  series  of  expressions,  the 
words  are  pluno  (to  wash)  and  ekkatharizo  (to  purify),  in 
the  other  baptizo.  Basil  says  that  the  import  of  both 
modes  of  expression  is  plainly  the  same.     Nor  is  this  all. 


K    ]  J  SCini'TtKE    IDtA    UK    I'.Ai -iisM.  1)5 

He  proceeds,  •  Since  then  the  Lord  has  connected  both 
(baptisms,)  namely,  that  from  water  to  repentance,  i.  e. 
Jehn's,  and  that  from  the  Spirit  to  regeneration,  i.  e. 
Christ's,  and  the  word,  Isa.  iv,  4,  alludes  to  both  baptisms, 
(t.  e.  Christ's  baptism,  and  that  of  fire,)  are  there  not 
three  significations  of  baptism  ?  '  Here  he  first  speaks  of 
baptism  in  the  plural,  (t.  e.  the  baptisms  of  John,  of 
Christ,  and  of  fire,)  and  as,  in  some  respects  alike,  in 
others  unlike  ;  and  this  seems  to  call  for  a  definition  of  the 
senses  of  the  word.  He  says  they  are  three,  and  proceeds 
to  give  them.  1.  Purification  from  filth.  2.  Regenera- 
tion by  the  Spirit.  -3.  Trial  or  proof  in  the  fire  of  the 
judgment.  There  are  three  kinds  of  purification.  One 
external  by  water— the  next,  internal  by  the  Spirit,  i.  e> 
regeneration — the  other,  a  purgation  by  the  fires  of  the 
judgment-day.  To  this  purgation  by  fire,  the  Fathers 
referred  the  words  of  Paul,  1  Cor.  iii,  13-15,  the  man 
saved  by  fire,  is  saved  by  Basil's  third  kind  of  purification. 
Concerning  this,  Hilarius  says,  '  Being  purified  by  fire  he 
may  be  saved.'  Hence  Basil  refers  a  part  of  the  purifi- 
cation to  this  world,  and  a  part  to  the  next,  but  considers 
it  all  as  baptism  in  one  way  or  another."  Nor  is  the  defi- 
nition accidental,  but  deliberate  and  formal.  He  fixes  his 
eye  fully  and  intently  upon  the  point.  He  brings  three 
cases  in  which  the  word  is  used.  Purification  is  common 
to  them  all, —  purification  by  water,  by  the  Spirit,  and  by 
fire.  There  is  a  generic  likeness,  but  a  specific  difference, 
and  so  he  defines  :  1.  Natural  purification  from  filth.  2s 
Spiritual  purification,  i.e.,  regeneration.  3.  Purgation 
by  trial  by  fire.  Hence  it  follows,  that  the  name  and  the 
nature  of  baptism  coincide,  in  import,  both  denote  purifi- 
cation. 

How  unlike  all  this  is  to  immersion,  I  need  not  say, 
Can  any  thing  be  more  to  the  point.  Is  it  not  enough  to 
say  that  to  wash  away  filth,  and  to  purge  (in  Isaiah,)  and 


9(5  IMPORT"    Of    feAPTlZO.  §   17 

to  baptize  in  tlie  New  Testament, —  are  equivalent  modes 
of  expression  ?  Is  it  not  enough,  that  Basil  speaks  of 
baptism  in  the  plural,  and  refers  two  to  this  world,  and 
one  to  the  next,  and  then  goes  on  to  define  three  corres- 
ponding senses  of  the  word,  and  that  each  sense  is  a 
purification,  and  neither  an  immersion  ?  What  more 
could  be  asked,  or  received  if  asked  ? 

2.  "  Nor  is  this  all,  Athanasius  testifies  explicitly  to 
the  same  effect.  Speaking  of  the  expression,  '  He  shall 
baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Spirit,'  he  expressly  states 
that  '  it  has  the  sacrificial  sense  to  purify,  t.  e.  to  remit  sins 
■ — and  to  express  this  sense,  he  uses  katharizo.  His 
words  are  :  '  The  expression,  "  He  shall  baptize  you  with 
the  Holy  Spirit,"  means  this,  that  "  He  shall  purify,  i.  e., 
absolve  you,  or  remit  your  sins.*'  That  this  is  the  sense 
is  plain,  for  he  adds:  "Because  the  purification  (bap- 
tisma)  of  John  could  not  do  this,  but  that  of  Christ, 
who  has  power  to  forgive  sins."  '  This  last  expression 
fixes  the  sense  of  katharizo,  to  the  remission  of  sins,  or 
sacramental  purification.  Athanasius,  therefore,  directly 
testifies  that  this  is  the  sense.  Let  us  hear  no  more,  then, 
of  immersion  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  Athanasius  declares, 
that  purification  by  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  sense. 

3:  "  Once  more,  the  lexicographers,  Zonaras  and  Pha- 
vorinus  define  baptisma  (baptism)  thus  :  'The  remission 
of  sins  by  water  and  the  Spirit — the  unspeakable  forgive- 
ness of  sin— the  loosing  of  the  bond  (i.  e.  of  sin)  granted 
by  the  love  of  God  towards  man.'  These  are  obviously 
all  equivalents  of  sacrificial  purification,  i.  e.,  remission  of 
sins.  They  would  be  perfect  definitions  of  katharismos. 
Are  not  two  words  synonymous  to  which  the  same  defini- 
tion can  be  truly  given  ?  These  definitions  are  not  the 
mere  opinions  of  Zonaras  and  Phavorinus.  They  are 
taken  from  the  ideas  of  the  Fathers,  and  nearly  in  their 
words.      They   also   give   definitions   of  the   moral    (or 


g    1^  SCRIPTLKE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  97 

spiritual)  sense  of  baptisma,  i.  e.,  moral  purification  — 
thus,  '  Tke  v&luntary  arrangement  of  a  new  life  towards 
God,  or  according  to  the  will  of  God,  the  releasing  or 
-recovery  of  the  soul,  i.  e.  from  sin,  for  that  which  is 
tetter,  i.  e.,  holiness.'  " 

'"  All  this  certainly  denotes  moral  purification,  or  the 
restoration  of  the  soul  to  a  new  and  holy  life.  It  is 
equivalent  to  Basil's  second  sense,  anagennesis  —  regene- 
ration. These  last  definitions  would  be  perfect  definitions 
of  katharismos,  as  denoting  moral  purification.  Again, 
I  ask  :  are  not  two  words  synonymous  to  which  the  same 
definitions  can  be  truly  given  ?  Nor  are  these  last  defi- 
tions  the  mere  opinions  of  Zonaras  and  Phavorinus. 
As  before  they  are  taken  from  the  Fathers,  and  are  given 
in  their  phraseology,  and  their  style.  Is  there  no  evidence 
in  all  this  ?  Is  it  nothing  that  two  lexicographers, 
writing  in  Greek,  define  baptisma  thus,  and  say  nothing 
of  immersion  ?  Does  this  look  as  if  immersion  is  the 
very  essence  of  baptism,  as  some  assert?  Why  is  all 
this  ?  The  reason  is  obvious  ;  they  were  giving  the 
ecclesiastical,  the  religious  sense  of  the  word,  and  in  so 
doing  they  could  give  nothing  else, 

"  But  who  was  Zonaras,  and  what  the  value  of  his 
lexicon  ?  He  was  one  of  the  four  leading  Byzantine 
historians.  He  wrote  Annals  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world  down  to  1118.  Also  a  Commentary  on  the  Apos- 
tolic Canons,  Decrees  of  Councils,  etc.  He  was  first  a 
Courtier  in  the  court  of  Alexius  Commenus,  then  Monk 
on  mount  Athos.  Of  his  history,  Tittman  says,  it  is  not 
surpassed  by  any  Byzantine  writer.  Of  his  Lexicon  :  '  I 
consider  it,  after  that  of  Hesychius,  the  most  learned  of 
all  others  that  survive,  the  most  copious,  and  the  most 
accurate  ;  so  that  by  it  we  can  correct  and  confirm  Suidas, 
the  author  of  the  Etymologium,  and  others,  and  even 
Hesychius  himself.     Finally,  it  is  invaluable  for  illnstrat- 

9 


IAfPOR'1     OF    15  AFi'  IZO  §    19 

lag  passages  of  authors — some  before  published,  others 
preserved  in  him  alone.'  The  question  is  not  as  to  the 
taste  and  rhetorical  excellence  of  Zonaras.  It  is  this  : 
Did  not  a  historian  who  wrote  in  Greek,  and  was  per- 
fectly familiar  with  the  writings  of  the  Greek  Fathers, 
and  who  wrote  commentaries  in  Greek  on  the  Apostolic 
Canons,  did  not  he  know  what  baptisma  means  ?  And 
yet  of  immersion  he  says  nothing;  every  definition  is  an 
equivalent  of  katharizo."  * 

§  18.  Relations  to  the  System  of  Writers. 

"  No  contrary  probability,  or  usage,  can  be  established 
from  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  age,  or  of  the 
preceding  age,  who  used  the  Alexandrian  Greek,  It  will 
be  noticed  that  the  argument  thus  far  is  specific,  and 
relates  to  the  religious  usage,  produced  at  a  particular 
time,  and  by  particular  circumstances,  definitely  and 
clearly  marked.  Nowt  to  refute  this  argument,  it  is  of  no 
use  to  go  to  writers  who  lived  and  wrote  entirely  out  of 
this  range  of  circumstances  and  ideas.  It  could  only 
prove  that,  in  other  circumstances,  another  usage  of  the 
word  did  exist,  and  this  no  one  need  deny.     But  it  is 

*  "Ambrose  (on©  of  the  Latin  Fathers)  taking  a  general  view  of  Jew- 
ish and  Heathen  absolutism,  thus  sums  the  whole  matter  :  ( Vol.  2,  page 
355.)  'There  are  many  kinds  of  (baptisrnatum)  purifications  ;  but  tbe 
Apostle  proclaims  one  (baptisma.)  Why?  There  are  (baptismata) 
purifications  (i.  e.  remissions  of  sin.)  Washings  they  are, —  (baptis- 
mata) purifications  (*.  e.  remissions  of  sin) —  they  cannot  be.  The  body 
is  washed,  but  sin  is  not  washed  away,  nay,  in  that  washing  sin  is  con- 
traqted.  There  were  also  (baptismata)  purifications  of  the  Jews;  some 
superfluous,  others  typical.'  Any  one  can  see  that  the  sense  of  this 
whole  passage  turns  on  assigning  to  baptismata  in  the  second  member 
of  the  antithesis,  the  sacrificial  sense  of  katharismos,  i.  e.  absolution,  or 
forgiveness  of  sins.  The  purifications  of  the  Gentiles,  were  not  real 
purifications,  for  this  reason  :  they  did  not  wash  away  sins." —  Beecker 
page  Mil. 


$   18  BCRIPTUBB    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  99 

very  noticeable  that,  in  the  very  writers  where  alone  proof 
of  an  opposite  religious  usage  or  even  of  a  probability  of 
it,  can  reasonably  be  looked  for,  there  is  none  to  be  found. 
It  is  in  these  very  writings  that  the  whole  current  of 
probability,  and  of  usage,  sets  strongly  the  other  way. 

"I  do  not  deny  that  these  writers  do  also  use  the  word 
baptizo,  in  other  circumstances,  and  in  a  secular  sense,  to 
denote  immersion,  sinking,  overwhelming  or  oppression. 
But  this  only  proves  that  the  two  usages  did  co-exist  ; 
just  as  Dr.  Carson  proves  that  the  two  usages  of  bapto 
did  co-exist  in  Hippocrates,  and  that  the  existence  of  the 
one  did  not  disprove  the  existence  of  the  other.  So  at 
least  four  meanings  of  the  word  spring  co-exist,  and  yet 
no  one  infers  from  one  that  the  others  do  not  exist. 

"  That  the  religious  usage  of  these  writers  all  sets  one 
way,  one  obvious  and  admitted  fact  may  show.  Dr. 
Carson  admits  that  all  the  lexicographers  and  commen- 
tators do  assign  to  the  word  baptizo  the  unlimited  sense 
to  wash  or  cleanse.  Now  on  what  writers  do  they  (the 
lexicographers  and  commentators)  rely?  Beyond  all 
dispute  on  the  writers  of  the  Alexandrian  (or  New  Testa- 
ment) Greek,  the  very  writers  who  have  furnished  all  the 
facts  on  which  this  argument  is  based.  And  these  writers 
be  it  noticed,  furnish  no  presumption  or  usage  the  other 
way.  Even  in  those  minuter  shades  of  meaning,  which 
are  furnished  by  allusion,  comparison,  or  association  of 
ideas,  all  things  tend  the  same  way.  So,  in  the  account 
of  the  baptism  of  Paul,  the  sacrificial  reference  of  baptism 
is  plainly  indicated.  Acts  xxii,  16  :  '  Arise,  and  be 
baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  upon  the  name 
of  the  Lord.'  Here  we  have  faith  in  Christ,  the  washing 
away,  or  pardon  of  sins,  and  a  purification  intended  to 
symbolize  it.  Baptisai,  purify  thyself,  or  be  purified 
bodily  —  apolousai  —  icash  away  thy  sins,  as  to  the  mind, 
by  calling  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.     Here  the  ami- 


1UU  IMPORT  OP  BAMiaO.  ^:18 

thesis  and  correspondence  are  beautiful  and  complete,  and 
one  seems  naturally  to  suggest  the  other.  So  the  case  in 
1  Peter  iii,  21,  when  he  speaks  of  baptism  as  saving  us, 
is  far  more  natural  and  beautiful,  if  we  adopt  this  sense, 
for  he  seems  to  think  that,  if  he  left  the  word  baptisma 
unguarded,  he  might  be  taken  to  mean  the  external  puri- 
fication of  the  body.  But  as  this  does  not  save  us,  and 
as  nothing  but  the  purification  of  the  mind  does,  he 
guards  himself,  and  says,  I  do  not  mean  the  putting  away 
the  filth  of  the  flesh,  by  the  purification  of  which  I  speak, 
but  the  answering  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God. 
Hence  too,  the  legal  or  sacrificial  sense  lies  upon  the  very 
face  of  the  passage  —  for  it  is  the  purification  of  the  con- 
science by  atoning  blood,  to  which  he  refers,  and  not  to 
an  external  washing  at  all  ;  and  I  need  not  say  to  any  one 
who  can  feel  the  nice  correspondencies  of  words,  how 
much  more  beautiful  and  clear  the  whole  passage  becomes 
by  assigning  to  baptismo  the  sense  of  a  spiritual  purifica- 
tion, by  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  Peter  affirms  that  it 
has.  — Beecher,  pp.  44,  45. 

In  further  illustration  of  this  subject,  I  will  close  this 
section,  by  adding  the  view  of  the  Fathers  upon  the  text 
last  quoted  (1  Pet.  iii,  21,  and  1  Cor.  x,  2.)  These 
passages  show  conclusively  that  the  writers,  in  both 
instances,  employed  the  word  baptisma  in  the  legal  or 
sacrificial  sense. 

"In  explaining  the  similitude  between  baptism  and  the 
salvation  of  Noah  in  the  ark,  also  between  baptism  and 
the  passage  of  the  Israelites  through  the  Red  sea  —  Noah 
and  the  Israelites  are  not  looked  on  by  the  Fathers  as 
immersed,  but  merely  as  purified  or  saved  :  and  that  too 
by  the  same  element  which  overwhelmed  and  destroyed 
the  enemies  of  God.  They  even  go  so  far  as  to  speak  of 
the  wicked  as  immersed,  by  way  of  antithesis  to  the  right- 
eous, who  are  not  immersed,  but  only  purified  and  saved. 


J    19  SCRlPTLTtE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  101 

This  view  is  based  on  the  expression  in  Peter,  '  saved  by 
water,'  as  applied  to  the  eight  souls,  who  were  saved  by- 
water  in  the  ark.  To  be  purified  by  them  was  equivalent 
to  being  sanctified,  or  being  saved;  and  in  looking  at 
baptism,  their  minds  were  fixed  on  1his  idea:  'Now,' 
said  they,  '  as  in  baptism  water  saves,  so  in  the  flood  it 
saved,  and  so  in  the  Red  sea  it  saved  ;  not  by  overwhelm- 
ing Xoah  or  the  Israelites,  but  by  dividing  them  from  the 
enemies  of  God,  and  by  overwhelming  and  immersing 
those  enemies.  And  its  similarity  to  baptism  lies  only  in 
the  fact,  that  it  saves  and  purifies  the  people  of  God."  — 
Beecher,  p.  73. 


§  19.  The  Final  Result. 


I  have  now  brought  the  arguments  derived  from  the 
usages  of  the  Alexandrine  or  New  Testament  Greek,  and 
from  the  scriptural  idea  of  baptism  to  a  close,  as  regards 
the  import  of  the  word  baptizo,  (and  baptismos  or  bap- 
tisma, )  and  am  fully  persuaded  tbat  the  evidence  elicited 
is  both  satisfactory  and  conclusive  ;  and  submit  the  follow- 
ing as  the  result  of  the  investigation  thus  far  : 

1.  There  is  a  remarkable  difference  between  the  Pagan 
classical  or  Greek  and  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament  ; 
owing  to  a  variety  of  influences,  such  as  the  extension  of 
the  Greek  language  in  the  east,  the  Septuagint  version  of 
the  scriptures,  etc.;  which  brought  that  beautiful  language 
to  be  applied  to  subjects  altogether  new  to  the  Greeks 
themselves,  especially  ideas  peculiar  to  a  revealed  and 
experimental  religion.  These  facts  subjected  the  word 
baptizo,  as  well  as  many  others,  to  great  and  important 
changes,  to  express   the  things   of  the  Spirit.      For  the 


lOli  IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §    l'J 

Pagan  Greeks  never  employed  the  word  baptizo  as  a  reli- 
gious term,  while  the  Jews,  on  the  other  hand,  never  used 
it  in  any  other  than  a  religious,  or  a  ceremonial  sense. 

2.  Baptizo,  the  word  selected  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
designate  the  ordinance  of  Christian  baptism,  is  a  term  of 
Greek  origin,  and  was  not  translated,  but  simply  transfer- 
red to  the  English  language,  as  it  had  been  to  the  Latin 
and  some  others,  as  &  sacred  name,  like  Jehovah,  Iniman- 
ual,  etc.,  by  which  to  denote  that  sacrament  through  all 
future  time ;  and  it  was  as  well  understood  as  any  other 
word  in  our  language,  until  the  natural  operation  of  the 
association  of  ideas  was  interrupted,  by  the  long  and  sore 
controversy  in  which  the  subject  is  now  involved. 

3.  And  the  word  baptizo,  according  to  its  classical 
usage,  includes  a  wide  range  of  meanings,  varying  from 
an  entire  submersion  in  a  fluid  —  as  water  —  to  a  mere 
smearing,  wetting,  or  sprinkling  with  a  fluid  ;  and  that  not 
by  metaphor,  as  some  contend,  but  by  an  extension  of  its 
literal  meaning.  And  it  is  employed  in  this  usage  of 
meaning,  both  as  a  specific  and  a  generic  term,  in  its  dif- 
ferent applications.  For  instance,  to  dip,  plunge,  immerse, 
pour  and  sprinkle,  are  all  specific  and  modal ;  while  to 
wash,  cleanse,  purify,  dye,  tinge,  wet,  moisten,  etc.,  are 
all  generic  ;  and  such  acts  may  be  performed  by  different 
modes  of  application.  Again  :  This  distinction  of  gene- 
ral and  specific  does  not  correspond  with  the  ordinary 
distinctions  relative  to  the  different  senses  of  the  word  as 
primary,  secondary,  etc.,  but  commingles  with  them  — 
for  instance,  dip,  plunge,  immerse,  belong  to  the  primary 
class  of  meanings  ;  while  pour  and  sprinkle,  (also  specific) 
will  range  under  the  third  class  of  meanings. 

4.  Finally,  the  Xew  Testament  meaning  of  baptizo  is, 
to  wash,  to  cleanse,  to  purify ;  which  corresponds  with 
the  secondary  meaning,  given  by  th*  lexicographers  and 


SCRIPTURE    iOEA    OF    BAPTISM-  IV* 

classical  writers  ;  and  ifl  analogous  to  the  idea  of  the 
Levitical  purification  expressed  in  the  Septuagint  by 
kathairo  or  katharizo,  (to  purffy,)  of  which  it 'is  a  perfect 
synonym.  A  ad  these  words,  tooth,  cleanse,  purify,  are 
not  specific  and  modal,  but  are  strictly  generic,  allowing 
the  greatest  latitude  as  to  mode. 

The  following  is  from  the  able  pen  of  Dr.  Hall,  pp. 
115,  11G,  "If  we  follow  the  scripture  pattern,"  says  he, 
"  or  the  pattern  of  the  Greek  of  the  Apocrypha,  (or  that 
of  Josephus  and  the  Fathers,)  in  fixing  the  proper  idea 
of  the  word  baptize,  as  used  to  denote  the  sacred  use  of 
water  in  a  religious  ordinance,  we  shall  entirely  omit  all 
reference  to  mode,  and  fix  our  thoughts  upon  the  intent 
-and  the  effect  of  "baptism  ;  the  substance  and  not  the 
shadow.  Baptism  will  not  be  a  dipping,  or  an  immer- 
sion,  or  a  pouring,   or  a  sprinkling,  but  a  washing,  a 

PURIFYING, 

"  The  word  being  thus  used  in  the  New  Testament,  to 
denote  a  ritual  washing  or  purifying,  (which  it  never  signi- 
fied in  classic  Greek)  ;  being  used  moreover  when  the 
-mode  of  purifying -was  either  sprinkling  or  pouring  ;  and 
being,  still  further,  so  used  that  to  make  it  read  immerse, 
would  make  the  Bible  speak  what  confessedly  is  not  true  ; 
I  think  we  have  clearly, —  and  established  beyond  the  pos- 
sibility of  a  successful  denial,  — a  generic  and  peculiar 
J^ew  Testament  use  of  the  word ;  in  which  use  baptize 
primarily  denotes  a  ritual  purifying  by  some  manner  of 
application  of  water ;  which  is  called  'the  washing  of 
water;'  and  secondary,  it  denotes  an  inward  purifying  by 
the  Holy  GhMt,  called  'the  washing  of  regeneration.'  " 

These  things  being  so,  how  idle  it  is  for  our  Baptist 
^brethren  to  ask,  as  they  often  do,  "  If  any  application  of 
water,  washing,  sprinkling,  pouring,  etc.,  means  baptism. 
•~hv  did  not  the  sacred  writers  sometimes  use  the  Greet 


i'04 


IMPORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  g    19' 


word  which  means  to  wash,  sprinkle,  and  pour  ?  "     The- 
reason  is  plain  : 

1.  Baptize  is  used  with  a  peculiar  but  generic  reference 
to  this  purifying,  without  any  reference  to  mode.  But  the 
word  sprinkle  and  pour  are  not  so  used.  Their  use  in  the 
New  Testament  is  not  limited  to  the  sacred  use  of  water  ; 
and  they  refer  to  mode ;  while  the  word  baptize  in  the- 
New  Testament,  refers  to  none.  They  cannot,  therefore,, 
be  interchanged  with  baptize,  as  though  they  were  synony- 
mous with  it.  The  word  wash  is  so  interchanged,  because 
it  so  far  accords  with  baptized  not  to  refer  to  any  par- 
ticular mode.  * 

2.  It  is  not  true  that  the  words,  wash,  sprinkle,  pour, 
are  not  used  in  the  New  Testament-  with  reference  to 
baptism.  As  often  as  anything  is  said  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  allusion  to  a  mode  of  baptism,  these  words  are 
Invariably  used.  As  to  the  word  wash,  as  has  been 
remarked,  the  scriptures  refer  to  baptism  as  '  the  washing 
of  water ;'  and  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  call 
'the  washing  of  regeneration.'  As  to  the  word  sprinkle, 
the  prophets  describe  the  purifying  which  they  foretell,  as 
a  sprinkling  ;  '  So  shall  He  sprinkle  many  nations/ 
'Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you/  etc.  As  to 
the  word  p>ov/r,  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's  baptizing,  is 
spoken  of  as  a  pouring  out,  a  shedding  forth,  a  falling 
upon,  etc. 

But  where  do  you  read  of  "  the  immersing  of  water," 
or  "  the  immersing  of  many  nations,"  or  "  the  immersing 
of  regeneration,"  or  of  "the  immersirhg  of  the  blood  of 
Christ  ?  "  No  wherein  the  word  of  God  :  no  where  even 
in  figure.  The  very  idea  is  strange  and  preposterous, 
"We  may  retort  the  question,  if  it  be  so,  that  baptism  is- 

*  See  the  >*ote  under  Section  1C. 


§    19  8CRIPTUAE    IDEA    OF    BAPTISM.  105 

nothing  but  immersion,  and  that  immersion  is  all  essential 
to  it  ;  why  is  it  that  we  never  read  of  "the  immersion  of 
regeneration,"  —  or  of  a  promise,  "then  will  I  immerse 
you  in  clean  water,  and  ye  shall  be  clean  ;"  or  of  "  the 
immersion  of  the  blood  of  Christ  ?  " 

I  will  close  this  section  in  the  language  of  Pres.  Beecher, 
p.  81.  He  says  :  ''To  conclude,  the  idea  of  purification 
is,  in  the  nature  of  things,  better  adapted  to  be  the  name 
of  the  rite,  than  immersion.  It  has  a  fitness  and  veri- 
similitude in  all  its  extensive  variety  of  usage,  which 
cause  the  mind  to  feel  the  self-evidencing  power  of  truth, 
as  producing  harmony  and  agreement  in  the  most  minute, 
as  well  as  in  the  most  important  relations  of  the  various 
parts  of  this  subject  to  each  other.  This  is  owing  to  three 
facts:  (1.)  The  idea  of  purification  is  the  fundamental 
idea  in  the  whole  subject.  (2.)  It  is  an  idea  complete 
and  definite  in  itself  in  every  sense,  and  needs  no  adjunct 
to  make  it  more  so.  (3.)  It  is  the  soul  and  center  of  a 
whole  circle  of  delightful  ideas  and  words.  It  throws  out 
before  the  mind  a  flood  of  rich  and  glorious  thoughts,  and 
is  adapted  to  operate  on  the  feelings  like  a  perfect  charm. 
To  a  sinner,  desiring  salvation,  what  two  ideas  so  delight- 
ful as  forgiveness  and  purify  ?  Both  are  condensed  into 
this  one  wrord.  It  involves  in  itself  deliverance  from  the 
guilt  of  sin,  and  from  its  pollution.*  It  is  a  purification 
from  sin  in  every  sense.  It  is  purification  by  the  atone- 
ment, and  purification  by  the  truth  —  by  water  and  by 
blood.  And  around  these  ideas  cluster  others  likewise,  of 
holiness,  salvation,  eternal  joy,  eternal  life.  No  word 
can  produce  such  delight  on  the  heart,  and  send  such  a 
flood  of  light  into  all  the  relations  of  divine  truth  ;  for 
purification,  in  the  broad  scripture  sense,  is  the  joy  and 
salvation  of  man,  and  the  crowning  glory  of  God. 
*  See  Section  13, 


>'fti  IMTORT  OF  BAPTIZO.  §19 

"  Of  immersion  none  of  these  things  are  true.  (1.)  Im- 
mersion is  not  a  fundamental  idea  in  any  subject  or  system. 
(2.)  By  itself,  it  does  not  convey  any  one  fixed  idea,  but 
depends  upon  its  adjuncts,  and  varies  with  them.  Immer- 
sion !  In  what  ?  Clear  water  or  filthy,  in  a  dying  fluid, 
or  in  wine  ?  Until  these  questions  are  answered,  the 
word  is  of  no  use.  And  with  the  spiritual  sense  (as  we 
have  just  seen)  the  case  is  still  worse  ;  for  common  usage 
limits  it  in  English,  Latin,  Greek,  and  so  far  as  I  know, 
in  all  languages,  by  adjuncts  of  a  kind  denoting  calamity, 
or  degradation,  and  never  purity." 


THE  MODE   OF   BAPTISM. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
The  Scripture  Mode  of  Baptism  —  Sprinkling. 

Having  produced  an  abundance  of  evidence  as  to  the 
Import  of  the  word  baptizo,  I  shall  now  proceed  to  the 
examination  of  the  mode  of  baptism  ;  and  feel  the  greatest 
confidence  that  I  shall  be  able  to  prove  to  a  demonstration, 
that  sprinkling  is  the  scriptural  mode  of  Christian  baptism  ; 
at  least  to  the  unbiased  mind. 

The  Bible  is  a  plain  book,  and  was  originally  designed 
to  be  read  and  understood  ;  and  doubtless,  when  rightly 
interpreted,  it  explains  itself.  And  as  the  rite  of  baptism 
is  one  of  the  sacraments  of  the  Xew  Testament,  and  as 
such  it  is  the  imperative  duty  of  all  men  to  become  familiar 
with  the  ordinance,  and  to  participate  in  it,  at  some  period 
in  life :  it  therefore  becomes  a  matter  of  the  very  first 
importance,  that  the  rite  be  well  understood  by  all,  in  its 
mode,  design,  and  significancy .  And  although  the  mode 
does  not  at  all  affect  the  ordinance  as  respects  its  validity, 
yet,  from  considerations  already  offered,  it  is  a  matter  of 
no  small  importance.  For  though  there  is  no  positive 
evidence  in  the  scriptures,  as  to  any  particular  mode  of 
application — from  the  incidental  way  in  which  it  occurs 
—  still,  by  taking  the  Old  and  Xew  Testament  in  connec- 
tion, and  looking  at  the  fundamental  idea  of  atonement 
and  purification  which  pervades  the  whole  scheme,  it  will 


108  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  20 

finally  conduct  the  inquiring  mind  to  the  proper  clue  to 
the  mode  of  Christian  baptism. 

The  great  system  of  truth,  or  scheme  of  human  redemp- 
tion, is  a  whole,  and  there  is  a  correspondence  in  all  its 
parts  ;  it  is  hence  altogether  reasonable,  that  there  should 
be  a  strict  analogy  between  the  purifications  of  the  Mosaic 
ritual  and  those  of  the  gospel.  For  doubtless  every 
important  truth  was  taught  under  the  former  dispensation 
by  metaphor,  figure,  type,  or  in  some  shape  or  other. 
And  if  sprinkling  was  chosen  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  a 
suitable  emblem  of  both  ceremonial  and  spiritual  purifica- 
tion under  the  former  dispensation,  is  it  at  all  improbable 
that  it  should  be  continued  under  the  latter,  to  denote  the 
principal  part  of  the  same  thing — the  remission  of  sins 
by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  sanctifying  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  ?  And  it  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  in 
all  the  purifications  of  the  law,  there  were  no  immersions 
of  persons  enjoined  —  it  is  true  there  were  of  things  in  a 
very  few  instances  —  and  they  were  all  to  be  performed 
b}r  washing,  bathing,  sprinkling  —  commonly  the  latter. 
Nevertheless,  it  is  also  true,  that  there  were  some  purifica- 
tions enjoined,  in  which  the  mode  of  application  was  not 
prescribed,  but  it  was  left  optionary  with  the  individuals 
themselves  as  to  mode  :  and  it  is  altogether  probable  that, 
under  the  circumstances,  there  were  some  immersions 
really  practiced. 

§  20.     Jewish  Purifications  — Baptism. 

In  Mark  vii,  4,  8,  and  Luke  xi,  38,  there  arc  baptisms 
brought  to  view,  but  not  immersions.  "  For  the  Phari- 
sees, and  all  the  Jews,  except  they  wash  (nipsonti*)  their 

*  "  The  force  of  Louo,  Nipto,  and  Pluno  : 

"  Louo,  of  its  own  force,  denotes  to  wash,  or  purify;  it  is  in  fact, generally 
used  to  denote  a  Trashing  or  purifying  of  the  whole  body,  whether  by 


I   20  SPRINKLING.  1U9 

hands  oft,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  elders. 
And  when  they  came  from  the  market,  except  they  wash 
they  eat  not,  and  many  other  things  there  he  which  they 
have  received  to  hold,  as  the  washing  of  cups,  and  pots, 
and  hrazen  vessels,  and  tables.' '  The  words  wash  and 
washing  are  in  the  original  (baptisontai ;)  except  they 
have  baptized  themselves  ;  and  (baptismons)  baptisms. 

"  Xothing  in  the  context  demands  the  sense  immerse, 
and  powerful  reasons  forbid  it.  All  must  confess  that 
purification  is  the  only  idea  involved  in  the  subject  of 
thought.  This  sense  fulfills  perfectly  all  the  exigencies  of 
the  passages.  I  know  indeed  that  is  said  by  some,  that 
in  Mark  there  is  a  rise  in  the  idea  from  the  lesser  washing 
of  the  hands,  which  was  common  before  all  meals,  to  the 
greater  washing  implied  in  the  immersion  of  the  body 
after  coming  from  the  market.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
there  is  simply  a  change  from  the  specific  to  the  general 
and  indefinite.  They  always  wash  their  hands  before 
meals,  and  when  they  return  from  the  market,  they,  in 
addition  to  this,  purify  themselves,  (as  the  nature  of  the 
case  may  require)  before  they  eat."  —  Beecher,  p.  38. 

1.   The  Primary  Idea  of  Purifying. 

"  The  thing  signified  by  baptism,  both  Jewish  and 
Christian,  as  we  have  seen,  is  purifying  or  cleansing.    But 

sprinkling,  affusion,  or  immersion  —  but  it  is  also  applied  to  hands,  face, 
and  feet  —  also  to  wood,  clothes,  couches,  cloaks,  etc.,  though  but  rarely 
in  this  last  sense. 

"  Nipto  applies  generally  to  washing  of  hands,  face,  and  feet,  also 
sometimes,  but  more  rarely,  to  bathing  the  whole  body,  in  the  case  of 
both  men  and  animals.  It  is  also  often  used  by  the  Fathers,  with  its 
compounds,  to  denote  the  cleasing  of  the  mind  from  sin,  excluding  the 
idea  of  hand  washing.  Sometimes  also,  it  is  applied  to  the  washing  of 
cups,  vessels,  and  tables. 

"  Pluno  is  generally  applied  to  clothes  —  but  also  to  the  body  and  all 
its  part3 ,  also  to  cups,  metals,  and  various  animal  substances."  —  Beecher, 
pctgea  210.  211. 


110  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §20 

the  primary  idea  of  purifying  or  cleansing  is,  the  appli- 
cation of  water  to  the  person  or  thing  purified  or  cleansed. 
So,  in  the  examples  already  referred  to,  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, of  ceremonial  cleansings  —  which  the  Apostle  calls 
baptisms,  the  water  was  applied  to  the  persons,  and  not 
the  persons  to  the  water.  They  were  in  every  instance 
performed  by  sprinkling."  —  Dr.  Peters,  p.  60. 

2.   The  Purification  of  Persons. 

"In  Luke  it  is  said:  'A  certain  Pharisee  besought 
him  (the  Saviour)  to  dine  with  him  :  and  he  went  in  and 
sat  down  to  meat.  And  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he 
marveled  that  he  had  not  first  washed  (baptized)  before 
dinner.'  So  of  the  first  part  of  the  verse  (Mark  vii,  4:) 
'Except  they  wash  (baptize)  they  eat  not.' 

"This  baptizing  was  the  simple  washing  of  the  hands 
with  a  little  water  drawn  from  the  water-pots,  and  poured 
on  them.  This  is  abundantly  proved  by  the  custom  still 
prevalent  in  eastern  countries.  It  was  a  mere  ceremonial 
washing,  and  the  water-pots  were  not  of  sufficient  dimen- 
sions to  render  immersion  possible.  They  contained  only 
'  two  or  three  firkins,'  that  is  about  ten  or  twelve  gallons 
1  apiece  ;  '  and  they  were  made  small  at  the  top,  like  a 
common  jar.  Yet  the  washing  of  the  hands  with  a  little 
water  drawn  from  those  pots,  and  poured  on  them,  was 
a  baptism,  that  is,  &  purification  of  the  whole  person  from 
ceremonial  defilement.  Thus  far  it  is  plain  that  baptisms 
were  performed  by  applying  the  water  to  the  person,  and 
not  the  person  to  the  water."  —  Dr.  Peters,  p.  62. 

Continues  he  :  "  I  will  here  add  the  following  brief 
remarks  : 

"1.  The  leading  idea  throughout  these  passages  is  that 
of  purification  —  a  purifying  '  according  to  the  tradition 
of  the  elders.'  Compare  Matt,  xv,  2  :  '  The  Pharisees 
and  Scribes  asked  him.   Why  walkest  not  thy  disciples 


I  20  SPRINKLING.  11  I 

according  to  the  tradition  of  the  elders,  but  eat  bread  with 
Unwashen  hands  ? ' 

"  2.  This  washing  (nipsonti)  of  the  hands  was  a  bap- 
tism, and  not  a  baptism  of  the  hands  only,  but  as  the 
form  of  the  original  language,  as  wTell  as  our  own  transla- 
tion shows,  a  baptism  of  the  persons  ;  they  (the  persons) 
were  baptized  when  their  hands  had  been  washed  for  a 
ceremonial  purpose. 

"  3.  The  word  washed  (ebaptisthe)  in  Luke  xi,  38,  isr 
letter  for  letter,  in  all  respects  precisely  the  same,  as  that 
used  in  Mark  i,  9  :  '  Jesus  (ebaptisthe)  was  baptized  of 
John  in  Jordan.'  In  Luke,  the  Holy  Ghost  affirms  the 
baptism  of  the  person  as  fully,  and  as  absolutely  as  he 
does  when  he  says,  Jesus  was  baptized  of  John  in  Jordan. 
Yet  the  baptism  in  Luke  was  no  immersion,  but  a  simple 
ablution  of  the  hands  by  pouring,  or  allowing  water  to 
run  over  them." 

These  two  passages  have  presented  insuperable  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  immersionists  of  all  descriptions.  It  is 
somewhat  amusing  to  look  at  the  many  shifts  and  dis- 
cordant theories  resorted  to  by  their  leading  writers,  to 
remove  these  difficulties  out  of  the  way,  and  make  immer- 
sion appear  at  least  possible  in  each  case.  I  will  here 
beg  indulgence  from  the  reader  to  make  a  brief  reference 
to  them,  even  at  the  expense  of  appearing  tedious  ;  and 
leave  the  indulgent  reader  to  make  his  own  reflections 
upon  those  palpable  discrepancies  and  inconsistencies. 

"Mr.  Jucfd,  in  his  reply  to  Prof.  Stuart,  p.  25,  trans- 
lates the  passage  in  Mark  vii,  4  :  "  And  when  they  came 
from  the  market,  except  they  baptisontai  —  baptize  them- 
selves.' In  the  same  manner  he  makes  the  Pharisee  in 
Luke  xi,  38,  wonder  that  Jesus  had  not  been  baptized 
before  dinner.  As  Mr.  Judd  maintains  that  baptize  must 
and  shall  mean  immerse,  he  maintains  that  baptize  not 
only  mav  have  its  usual  meaning  here,   but    that   'that 


112  MODE  OF    BAPTISM.  §  20 

meaning  is  absolutely  required  by  the  scope  and  harmony 
of  the  passages  ;  '  that  is,  he  will  make  the  scripture  here 
testify  that  the  Pharisees  and  all  the  Jews  immersed  their 
whole  bodies  before  eating,  as  often  as  they  came  from 
the  market." 

"  The  learned  George  Campbell,  whom  our  Baptist 
brethren  are  so  fond  of  quoting  on  these  passages,  finds  it 
impossible  to  carry  out  his  theory.  He  is  about  the  work 
of  translating  the  New  Testament ;  and  he  is  determined 
beforehand  that  baptize  must  mean  exclusively  immerse. 

"  Mark  says,  that  the  '  Pharisees  and  all  the  Jews, 
when  they  came  from  the  market,  except  they  baptize 
themselves,  eat  not.'  Mr.  Campbell  does  not  believe  that 
they  immersed  themselves  as  often  as  they  came  from  the 
market.  What  does  he  do  ?  Does  he  gi^e  a  grammati- 
cal and  faithful  translatioti  of  the  word  baptize  ?  He  does 
not.  He  gives  no  translation  :  he  makes  a  gloss  ;  he  gives 
a  commentary,  and  '  corrects  and  alters  the  diction  '  of 
the  Scriptures,  by  substituting  his  comment  in  the  place 
of  the  word  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth.  And  this 
is  his  comment  —  for  no  scholar,  I  trust,  will  ever  ven- 
ture to  call  it  a  translation.  '  For  the  Pharisees,  and 
indeed  all  the  Jews  who  observe  the  tradition  of  the 
elders,  eat  not,  except  they  have  washed  their  hands  by 
pouring  a  little  water  upon  them.'  The  words,  '  by  pouring 
a  little  water  upon  them,'  are  not  in  the  original ;  they 
are  inserted  by  Mr.  Campbell.  I  would  demand,  does 
the  word  nipto  necessarily  limit  the  mode  of  washing  to 
'pouring  a  little  water  on  the  hands  ?  '  Does  it  not  mean 
to  wash,  and  simply  to  wash,  without  referring  in  the 
least  to  the  mode  ;  whether  by  pouring  the  water  on  the 
hands,  or  by  dipping  them  ?  " 

"  The  remarks  of  Prof.  Ripley  on  these  two  passages, 
in  his  examination  of  Prof.  Stuart,  are,  it  seems  to  me,  as 
curious  a  piece  of  non-committal,  and  of  tripping  lightly 


§  20  SPRINKLING.  113 

over  ground   on  which  one  dares  not  to  tread  firmly  as 
can  be  found  in  the  whole  compass  of  biblical  criticism. 

"  He  thinks  the  passage  in  Mark  may  be  rendered, 
'  without  the  least  violence  to  its  language,'  so  as  to 
make  it  read  that  the  Pharisees  and  all  the  JeAvs,  immerse 
their  whole  bodies,  as  often  as  they  come  from  the  market. 
(Mark  it)  may  be  rendered  '  without  violence  to  the  lan- 
guage ! '  instead  of  ascertaining  what  the  truth  is,  and 
giving  a  faithful  rendering  accordingly."  *  *  *  See 
Dr.  Hall,  pp.  100,  104. 

3.   The  Purification  of  Things. 

"But  there  were  also  ceremonial  purifications  of  things 
—  as  well  as  of  persons,  among  the  Jews,  which  Christ 
and  his  Apostles  were  accustomed  to  speak  of  as  baptisms. 
The  Evangelist  Mark  says  (vii,  4,)  of  the  Pharisees  and 
all  the  Jews  :  '  When  they  come  from  the  market,  except 
they  wash,  (baptisontai)  they  eat  not.  And  many  other 
things  there  be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold,  as  the 
washing  (baptismous)  of  cups  and  pots,  and  brazen  ves- 
sels, and  tables.'  The  word  here  translated  tables  is 
klinon,  and  properly  signifies  beds  or  couches.  It  is  so 
translated  in  the  thirtieth  verse  of  this  chapter,  and  eight 
other  places  where  it  occurs  in  the  Xew  Testament.  They 
had  no  chairs,  and  these  couches  were  a  kind  of  sofa  or 
divan,  on  which  they  were  accustomed  to  sit,  leaning  on 
each  other,  according  to  the  usual  modes  of  sitting  in 
those  days. 

"Now  the  'cups,  and  pots,  and  brazen  vessels,'  here 
spoken  of,  may  possibly  have  been  immersed  all-over  in 
water.  But  this  is  by  no  means  probable.  They  doubt- 
less washed  them  in  a  common  sense  way,  by  the  applica- 
tion of  water  with  the  hand,  or  a  cloth,  holding  them 
partly  in  the  water,  or  over  it ;  or  they  poured  water  on 
them,  to  suit  their  convenience.     And  to  suppose  that  the 

10 


114  MODS  OF    BAPTISM.  §  20 

beds  or  couches  were  immersed,  would  be  preposterous, 
especially  if  we  consider  the  superstition  of  the  Jews, 
which  led  them  to  practice  these  purifications  many  times 
in  a  day.  To  have  immersed  their  couches  so  often, 
would  have  kept  them  constantly  unfit  for  use.  Besides, 
these  washings,  or  baptisms,  were  merely  ceremonial,  and 
we  have  already  seen  that  such  purifications  or  baptisms, 
in  many  cases,  were  performed  by  sprinkling." — Dr. 
Peters,  pp.  60,  62. 

But  if  it  is  still  insisted  that  tables  is  the  correct  ren- 
dering of  the  word  klinon,  it  does  not  help  the  case. 
"  Whoever  considers  what  cumbersome  pieces  of  furniture 
these  tables  were — fifteen  or  twenty  feet  long,  by  four  feet 
broad,  and  about  four  feet  high —  may  judge  whether  they 
w ere  plunged  after  every  meal  taken  upon  them." 

Says  Pres.  Beecher,  page  39 :  "  But  above  all,  the 
immersion  of  the  couches  on  which  they  reclined  at  meals, 
is  Out  of  the  question.  That  this  is  the  meaning  of  klinon 
here,  the  whole  context  shows,  and  all  impartial  critics 
allow  ;  and  these  were  large  enough  for  three  to  recline 
upon  at  their  ease.  And  are  we  to  believe  that  the  Phari- 
sees and  all  the  Jews,  were  in  the  habit  of  immersing 
these  ?  Is  it  likely  that  a  whole  nation  ever  held  to  a 
practice  like  this  ?  That  they  should  purify  them  with 
various  uncommanded  rites  is  altogether  probable.  But 
that  they  should  immerse  them  is  totally  incredible. 

Dr.  Carson  seems  to  feel  this  point  keenly,  and  yet 
manfully  maintains  his  ground.  He  says  that  he  will 
maintain  an  immersion  until  its  impossibility  is  proved, 
and  suggests  that  the  couches  might  be  so  made  as  to  be 
taken  to  pieces  for  this  end  !  " 


§  21  «piunki;i>n(..  Ill- 

§  21.  Levitical  Purifications  —  Baptisms, 

**  In  Heb.  ix,  10.  we  read  of  a  ritual  service  which 
stood  only  in  meats,  and  drinks,  and  divers  washinga, 
-in  the  original  it  is  (diaphorois  baptismois)  '  divers 
baptisms.' 

"  In  tliis  ease  the  word  dees  not  relate  to  the  ordinance 
of  Christian  baptism,  but  to  Mosaic  purifications.  Yet 
it  is  still  a  religious  use  of  the  word ;  moreover  it  is 
-applied  with  reference  to  those  very  usages,  of  which  I 
have  spoken,  as  adapted  to  cause  the  word  baptizo  to 
pass  from  its  original  to  its  secondary  sense,  to  purify. 
Hence  it  is  an  example  of  great  weight  in  the  case,  and, 
&s  might  have  been  expected,  it  has  been  strongly  con- 
tested. But  with  how  little  reason  I  shall  endeavor  to 
show."  —  Peters. 

"The  scope  of  the  chapters  eight,  nine,  and  ten,  is  to 
show  that  the  purifications  legal  and  moral,  provided  by 
Christ  for  the  conscience  and  the  heart,  had  in  themselves 
a  real  efficacy,  and  were,  therefore,  entirely  superior  to 
those  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  which  related  only  to 
the  body,  and  could  produce  no  purity  but  such  as  was 
merely  external  and  symbolical.  Let  now  the  following 
things  be  noticed ; 

1.  "Those  things  only  are  spoken  of  in  the  whole 
discussion,  which  have  a  reference  to  action  on  the  wor- 
shipers—  that  is,  the  whole  passage  relates  to  the  effects 
of  the  Mosaic  ritual  entirely  oxipersons,  and  not  on  things. 
The  gifts,  the  sacrifices,  the  blood  of  sprinkling,  the  ashes 
of  a  heifer,  sprinkling  the  unclean,  all  relate  to  persons. 

2.  "  The  baptisms  are  spoken  of  as  enjoined,  as  well  as 
the  other  rites.  But  of  persons,  no  immersions  at  all  are 
enjoined  under  the  Mosaic  ritual. 

3.  "The  onlv  immersions  enjoined  in  the  Mosaic  law 


lift  MODS   OF  BAPTISM.  §22 

were  immersions  of  things,  to  which  no  reference  can  he 
had  here,—  as  vessels,  sacks,  skins,  etc.  In  this  case  no 
act  was  performed  that  directly  affected  the  body  of  the 
worshiper 3  bnt  only  the  thing  immersed.  But  in  all  this 
passage,  Paul  regards  the  ritual  with  reference  to  its  effects 
on  the  worshiper. 

4.  "  Besides,  the  purifications  of  the  persons  are  divers, 
various  ;  but  the  immersions  of  things  are  not,  either  in 
act,  or  circumstance,  or  end.  If  vessels  or  things  became 
unclean,  in  the  cases  specified,  they  were  all  immersed, 
and  all  alike  —  and  all  for  the  same  end.  What  various 
immersions  here  : 

"  On  the  other  hand,  the  purifications  of  men  were 
exceedingly  numerous,  and  of  various  kinds.  Some  were 
legal  and  sacrificial,  relating  to  the  atonement,  and  made 
by  blood.  Others  were  moral,  relating  to  regeneration 
and  purity  of  heart,  as  symbolized,  sometimes  by  various 
kinds  of  washing,  and  other  times  by  sprinkling.  To  all 
these  various  kinds  reference  is  had  in  the  context."  — 
Abridged  from  Beecher,  pages  34,  36. 

"Let  us  recur  then  to  the  remark  with  which  this 
section  was  introduced,  viz  :  that  there  were  various  ritual 
or  prescribed  observances,  under  the  law  of  Moses,  in 
which  both  water  and  blood  were  used  as  emblems  of 
purification  or  cleansing.  And  the  '  water-pots  '  and 
other  preparations  for  these  observances  were  in  common 
use  in  our  Saviour's  time.  So,  at  the  marriage  feast  at 
Cana  of  Galilee,  we  read  (John  ii,  6,)  that  'there  were 
set  there  six  water-pots  of  stone,  after  the  manner  of  the 
purifying  of  the  Jews,  containing  two  or  three  firkins 
apiece.'  These  things  were  all  familiar  to  Christ  and  his 
Disciples,  long  before  Christian  baptism  was  instituted, 
and  when  they  spoke  of  them  in  the  Greek  language,  they 
called  them  purifyings  or  baptisms.  So  (Heb.  ix  10,) 
the  Apostle  speaks  of  the  Jewish  ritual  service  as  standing 


§  21  SPKZNKLIXO.  117 

in  'meats  and  drinks,  and  divers  washings,'  (baptisms.) 
Then  going  on  to  compare  the  Jewish  dispensation  with 
that  of  Christ,  to  show  the  glory  of  the  latter,  he  refers 
to  one  of  these  divers  baptisms,  and  shows  us  what  he 
means. 

"  The  case  to  which  he  refers  is  that  described  (Num. 
xix,  18,)  as  follows  :  and  for  an  unclean  person  they 
shall  take  of  the  ashes  of  the  burnt  heifer  of  purification 
for  sin,  and  running  water  shall  be  put  thereto  in  a  vessel ; 
and  a  clean  person  shall  take  hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  the 
water,  and  sprinkle  it  upon  the  lent,  and  upon  all  the 
vessels,  and  upon  the  persons  that  were  there,  and  upon 
him  that  touched  a  bone,  or  one  slain,  or  one  dead,  or  a 
grave.'  Now  it  is  this  sprinkling,  which  the  Apostle 
refers  to,  as  one  of  the  divers  baptisms,  which  were  prac- 
ticed among  the  Jews,  and  says  (Heb.  ix,  13,  14:)  'If 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes  of  a  heifer, 
sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctifieth  to  the  purifying  of  the 
flesh,  how  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ,  etc., 
purge  your  conscience  from  dead  works.' 

"It  is  clear,  from  these  expressions,  that  sprinkling,  in 
the  mind  of  the  Apostle,  was  a  mode  of  baptism.  It  was 
a  baptism  too,  which  was  emblematic  of  'purification,  the 
very  thing  that  baptism  signifies  under  the  gospel,  accord- 
ing to  the  different  ideas  of  purification  in  the  two  dispen- 
sations, the  one  of  the  flesh,  the  other  of  the  Spirit.  And 
the  sprinkling  was  here  performed  in  a  summary  way, 
with  a  bunch  of  hyssop,  which  they  dipped  in  the  fluid 
and  sprinkled  it  upon  the  people  in  groups,  as  they  stood. 
This  hyssop  was  a  small  herb,  probably  resembling  moss. 
It  is  spoken  of  (1  Kings,  iv,  33)  where  it  is  called  the 
'  hyssop  that  springeth  out  of  the  wall.'  This  they  used 
alone,  or  mixed  it  with  wool,  as  a  kind  of  sponge,  for 
the  purpose  of  retaining  water.  And  the  sprinkling  with 
this  was  a  baptism,  in  the  scripture  meaning  of  baptizo. 
It  is  here  called  a  baptism  by  the  Apostle. 


118  MODE    OY*  MAl'TlsM.  §  21 

"  He  proceeds  to  speak  of  a  similar  baptism  performed 
by  Moses,  when  he  dedicated  the  first  testament,  and  says, 
(Heb.  ix,  19)  :  '  When  Moses  had  spoken  every  precept 
to  all  the  people,  according  to  the  law,  he  took  the  blood 
of  calves  and  of  goats,  with  water,  and  scarlet  wool,  and 
hyssop,  and  sprinkled  both  the  book  and  all  the  people.* 
The  reference  is  to  Exod.  xxiv,  5-8.  How  grand  and 
solemn  was  the  occasion,  when  Moses  thus  dedicated  the 
covenant !  There  were  at  that  time  six  hundred  thousand 
men  capable  of  bearing  arms  in  Israel.  The  people  must 
have  numbered  two  or  three  millions.  Yet  they  were  all 
baptized  with  water,  mingled  with  blood,  and  sprinkled, 
upon  them  from  a  bunch  of  hyssop  and  wool,  as  an 
emblem  of  their  religious  purification  before  God.  Now 
it  is  in  vain  to  say  that  these  were  Jewish  ordinances 
which  were  done  away  in  Christ,  and  therefore  prove 
nothing.  They  do  prove  the  very  thing  for  which  I  bring 
them  forward.  They  prove  that  sprinkling  in  the  mind 
of  the  Apostle,  so  far  as  the  meaning  of  the  word  is 
concerned,  was  a  mode  of  baptism. 

"  Another  of  these  divers  baptisms  is  described  in  Num. 
viii,  7.  In  purifying  the  Levites  and  setting  them  apart 
to  their  office,  Moses  says  :  '  Thus  shalt  thou  do  unto 
them  to  cleanse  them  ;  sprinkle  the  water  of  purifying 
upon  them.'  etc.  The  leper  was  in  like  manner  to  be 
cleansed  by  sprinkling.      Lev.  xiv,  7. 

"  Sprinkling,  then,  among  the  Jews  was  the  emblem  of 
cleansing  or  purification.  But  Christ  and  his  Apostles 
were  born  in  the  Jewish  Church,  and  were  familiar  with 
the  idea  so  often  exemplified  in  the  daily  services  to  which 
they  were  accustomed.  So,  when  speaking  of  the  spiritual 
cleansing  produced  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  Paul  calls  it 
'the  blood  of  sprinkling,'  Heb.  xii,  24;  and  Peter  calls 
it  « the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,'  1  Pet.  i,  2. 

"  Now  Christian  bnptism  was  instituted  as  an  emblem 


§  22  SPRINKLING.  119 

of  this  same  internal  spiritual  cleansing,  of  which  both 
Paul  and  Peter  speak  above,  as  a  sprinkling.  This  was 
the  idea  in  their  minds  when  they  thought  of  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  ordinance  of  baptism  They  never  speak 
of  it  as  an  immersion  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  or  an  immer- 
sion in  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  attach  no  such  ideas  to 
the  mode  of  purification,  external  or  internal,  whether  by 
blood,  by  water,  or  by  Spirit.     *      *      * 

"From  these  facts,  so  fully  attested,  it  must  be  inferred, 
that  sprinkling,  so  far  as  the  mode  is  concerned,  was  the 
idea  in  the  minds  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles  in  the  insti- 
tution of  baptism,  as  an  emblem  of  the  spiritual  cleansing 
^persons.  Carrying  this  idea  into  practice,  they  would 
naturally  adopt  sprinkling  as  their  mode  of  baptism. 
That  they  actually  did  baptize  in  this  mode  will  appear 
still  more  probable,  from  considerations  yet  to  be  intro- 
duced."—  Dr.  Peters,  pp.  44-50. 

§  22.    Purification  by  the  Blood  of  Christ  —  Sprink- 
ling. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  chief  efficacy  of  all  the 
Levitical  purifications  —  whether  by  water  or  by  blood — - 
lay  in  the  fact  that  they  were  sprinkled.  Shed  blood 
alone  would  not  suffice  —  it  must  not  only  be  shed,  but 
also  applied  by  sprinkling,  to  benefit  the  worshiper.  So, 
of  the  paschal  lamb,  (Exod.  xii,  7,  22.)  It  would  not 
suffice  to  slay  the  lamb,  but  to  render  it  available  when 
the  destroying  angel  passed  through  the  land,  the  blood 
must  be  sprinkled  upon  the  "posts  and  lintels  of  the 
door."  This  was  God's  method  of  deliverance  in  that 
instance  ;  and  that  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  the  lamb 
was  regarded  by  the  Greek  Fathers  as  a  baptism.  Then 
it  was  that  every  dwelling  in  Goshen  was  marked  for 
preservation.     And  so,  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  our 


120  MODE  OF  BAPTISM.  §   %£ 

Passover.  It  is  of  uo  avail  that  his  most  precious  blood 
has  been  shed  for  us,  unless  it  is  also  applied  in  the  way 
of  God's  own  appointment  —  it  must  be  sprinkled  upon 
our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  All  our  race  are  as  much 
exposed  to  destruction,  by  the  impending  wrath  of  a  sin- 
hating  God,  as  any  of  the  dwellers  in  Goshen,  until  we 
are  like  them,  marked  for  preservation  by  the  sprinkling 
of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  Hence,  from  all  these 
instances  collected  from  the  law  —  which  was  the  shadow 
of  good  things  to  come — we  are  brought  to  the  conclusion 
that,  the  main  efficacy,  nay,  the  very  essence  of  these 
rites,  was  lodged  in  the  sprinkling  —  the  prescribed  mode 
of  application  ;  which  was  also  symbolical  of  moral  or 
spiritual  purification. 

It  is  a  conceded  fact,  so  far  as  I  know,  that  the  main 
design  of  water  baptism  is  to  represent  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  in  all  its  efficacy,  to  remit  sin  and  purify  the  heart, 
In  this  it  corresponds  with  the  legal,  or  sacrificial  sense 
of  baptism ;  or,  in  other  words,  with  the  relation  which 
baptism  sustains  to  the  atonement  of  Christ.*  In  this 
sense,  baptism  also  corresponds  with  the  double  object  of 
atonement :  1;  To  remove  the  guilt  of  sin,  or  the  liability 
to  suffer  the  penalty  of  the  law ;  and,  2.  To  remove  the 
pollution  of  sin,  or  to  purify  the  heart,  and  produce 
holiness  of  life.  The  scriptures  uniformly  ascribe  their 
invaluable  blessings  to  the  atonement  or  blood  of  Christ, 
as  applied  to  the  awakened  conscience.  We  are  repre- 
sented as  redeemed  by  his  blood,  as  justified  by  his  blood, 
as  purged  or  cleansed  by  his  blood,  and  as  washed  from 
our  sins  in  his  own  blood;  "  He  by  himself  purged  our 
sins,"  Heb.  i,  3;  "And  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  his 
Son,  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin,"  1  John  i,  7. 

The  doctrine  of  atonement,  as  has  been  frequently 
remarked,  is  brought  prominently  to  view,  and  pervades 
*Sep  %  13. 


g  25  sprineli>:o.  121 

the  whole  system  of  salvation.     The  advent,  sufferings, 

and  atonement  of  Christ,  had  long  been  the  subject  of 
promises  and  prophecies,  and  the  objects  of  faith  to  the 
Old  Testament  saints  ;  and  his  saving  benefits  were  typi- 
cally set  forth  in  the  Mosaic  ritual,  especially  in  the  puri- 
fication by  "water  and  blood."  Says  the  Apostle,  (Heb. 
ix,  '22,)  "And  almost  all  things  are  by  the  law  purged 
with  blood;  and  without  shedding  of  blood  is  no  remission." 

But,  in  the  fullness  of  time,  the  promised  Deliverer  did 
come,  and  when  he  expiated  our  sins  on  the  Eoman  cross, 
"a  soldier  pierced  his  side  with  a  spear,  and  forthwith 
came  thereout  blood  and  water."  And  the  Apostle  John 
says,  1  Epistle  v,  6,  "This  is  he  that  came  by  water 
and  blood,  even  Jesus  Christ,  not  by  water  only,  but  by 
zvater  and  blood."  His  coming  had  been  presented  to  the 
eye  of  faith  by  these  striking  symbols  all  along  through 
the  former  dispensation.  But  his  advent  opened  to  the 
house  of  David  that  fountain  of  purification,  which  Zech- 
ariah  saw  in  vision, "and  which  John  celebrates,  as  the 
Fountain  of  the  Water  of  Life,  for  the  washing  away  of 
sin  and  uncleanness. 

It  was  in  view  of  this  Fountain  of  living  water  —  or  the 
atonement  of  Christ  —  that  God  had  said,  by  his  prophet, 
in  reference  to  the  gospel  day,  "  Then  will  I  sprinkle  dean 
water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean,"  Eze.  xxxvi,  25  ; 
and  the  Saviour  said  to  Xicodemus,  (John  iii,  5,)  "  Ex- 
cept a  man  be  born  of  water,  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  The  reference  was  made 
directly  to  the  method  of  purifying,  as  practiced  among 
the  Jews,  and  in  language  well  understood  by  that  distin- 
guished master  in  Israel.  And  it  was  in  reference  to  that 
same  Fountain  of  Life,  that  John  speaks,  when  in  vision 
he  saw  a  great  multitude  of  the  redeemed  before  the 
throne,  who  had  ivashed  their  robes,  and  made  them  ivhite 
in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  Rev.  vii,  9,   14.     "Again,  he 

11 


Vl'l  H   01     BAF3  J  2* 

heard  tliem  ascribing  their  redemption  to  his  blood,  in 
these  strains,  "Unto  him  that  loved  us,  and  washed  us 
from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood,"  etc.  Rev.  i,  6. 

Now,  the  use  which  I  wish  to  make  of  these  remarks 
is,  to  obtain  additional  evidence  in  favor  of  the  scripture 
mode  of  baptism.     The  Apostle  says,  (Heb.  ix,  13,  14,) 
"  For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes  of 
a  heifer,  sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctiiieth,  to  the  purify- 
ing of  the  flesh  ;  how  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  C&risf 
'purge  your  conscience  from  dead  works,  to  serve  the  living 
God.     The  sentence  is  elliptical,  and,  if  supplied,  would 
read  thus:  "How  much  more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ 
(sprinkling  the  heart)  purge  your  conscience  from   dead 
works,  etc.     There  is  a  comparison  instituted  between  the 
blood  of  Christ  and  the  blood  of  animals  slain  in  sacrifice. 
The  one  availed  for  the  purification  of  the  flesh  ceremo- 
nially, but  could  not  reach  and  affect  the  conscience ;  the 
other — the  blood   of  Christ — could  purge  or  purify  the 
conscience  ;  but  the  mode  of  application   is  the*  same — 
that  of  sprinkling.     But  if  any  should   still   doubt  the 
correctness  of  this  position,  with  regard  to  the  mode  of 
application — and,  by  consequence,  the  mode  of  baptism — 
there  is  another  text  upon  the   subject,  both  clear  and 
explicit:    (Heb.  x.  22,)   "Having  our  hearts   sprinkled 
from  an  evil  conscience,  and  our  bodies  washed  ivith  pare 
water."     HfhR  pure  water  is,  doubtless,  the  water  used  in 
baptism,  which  is  called   a   washing,   in   allusion  to  the 
water  of  separation,  (Num.  xix,  13,  21.)     But  the  heart 
is  also  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience  by  the  blood  of 
Christ,  called  the  blood  of  sprinkling ;  and  which  possesses 
efficacy   to  purge    or   wash  away   sin,    and    to    produce 
what  Peter  calls  a  good  conscience,   1  Epis.  iii,  21.     The 
Apostle,  speaking  of  a  baptism  which  now  saves  us,  by 
the  resurrection   of  Jesus   Christ,  says,   it  is  "  not   the 
putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh.,"  $s  the  different  kinds 


§  22  SPRINKLING.  123 

of  baptisms  did  under  the  law,  for  the  ceremonially 
unclean,  "  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards 
God," — that  is,  a  conscience  sprinkled  with  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  'purged  from  dead  works,  to  serve  the 
living  God.  Hence,  there  is  a  higher  baptism  than  that 
connected  with  the  Jewish  ceremonial,  which  reaches  and 
changes  the  heart,  and  purges  or  purifies  the  conscience ; 
and  that  baptism  is  accomplished  by  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Now,  it  is  not  contended  that  there  is  a  literal  applica- 
tion of  Christ's  blood  to  the  polluted  soul  of  man.  The 
language  is  figurative.  There  could  be  no  real  contact 
between  matter  and  spirit.  The  application  is  a  virtual 
and  spiritual  one.  It  is  made  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  by 
virtue  of  the  obedience,  sufferings,  and  atonement  of 
Christ.  The  blood  of  Christ  was  actually  shed  to  main- 
tain the  dignity  of  the  Divine  government ;  and  it  pos- 
sesses a  cleansing  virtue,  a  purifying  merit,  in  a  moral 
point  of  view,  which  is  applied  to  the  heart  and  conscience 
at  the  moment  of  conversion.  Hence,  there  is  a  relation 
existing  between  the  atonement  of  Christ  and  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin  —  between  the  reception  of  water  baptism  and 
the  thing  which  it  signifies  —  the  application  of  Christ's 
blood  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  Of  course,  then,  the  baptism 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  remission  of  sins  by  the  blood 
of  Christ  is,  in  fact,  the  same  thing  ;  and  it  is  effected  by 
virtue  of  the  atonement  of  Christ ;  and  the  Spirit's  mode 
of  baptizing,  or  mode  of  applying  the  blood  of  atonement, 
is  by  sprinkling. 

In  conclusion,  we  arrive  at  the  following  truths  : 

1.  The  subject  of  discussion  in  this  section  has  been, 
the  great  design  of  water  baptism  to  set  forth,  symbolically, 
spiritual  baptism  ;  or,  the  purification  of  the  heart  and 
conscience  by  an  application  of  the  blood  of  Christ. 

2.  The  mode  of  application  employed  by  the  Spirit  of 


124  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  23 

God  is  invariably  represented  in  the  scriptures  as  being 
by  sprinkling  the  blood  of  Christ :  and  it  is  hence  called 
"  the  blood  of  sprinkling,"  and  "  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ"  Heb.  xii,  24,  and  1  Pet.  i,  2. 

3.  Accordingly,  the  laws  of  rhetoric  require  that  there 
should  be  a  strict  analogy  between  the  symbol  and  the 
thing  adumbrated  or  represented  by  the  figure.  Then, 
water  baptism  is  the  symbol,  or  shadow,  and  spiritual 
baptism  is  the  substance  —  the  reality.  Well,  spiritual 
baptism  is  performed  by  sprinkling.  Therefore,  the  best 
laws  of  language  imperiously  require  that  the  water  in 
baptism  should  be  applied  in  the  like  manner,  viz.,  by 
sprinkling  —  not  immersion. 

I  now  ask,  in  the  name  of  common  sense,  what  analogy 
can  exist  between  sprinkling  and  immersion,  in  respect  to 
mode  ?  Now,  what  possible  analogy  can  exist  between 
an  immersion  of  the  body  under  water,  and  the  sprink- 
ling of  the  heart  with  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  None 
at  all.  But  the  strangest  inappropriateness — the  strangest 
incongruity  ! 

§  23.  Purification  by  the  Holy  Spirit  —  Baptism  by 
Pouring  and  Sprinkling. 

"  In  1  Cor.  xii,  13,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  directly  said  to 
baptize,  and  in  this  case  all  external  acts  are,  of  course, 
excluded,  zxA purify ^  (or  regenerate,)  is  the  only  appro- 
priate sense.  '  For  by  one  Spirit  are  we  all  baptized  into 
one  body  *  *  *  and  have  been  all  made  to  drink 
into  one  Spirit.' 

"  If  any  shall  say  that  admitting  to  the  Church  by  the 
external  rite  is  here  meant,  I  reply,  that  is  never  performed 
by  the  Spirit,  but  by  man.  But  this  baptism  is  as  much 
an  internal  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  causing  to 
drink  into  one  Spirit,  which  is  not  external,  but  an  inter- 
nal and  real  work  of  the  Spirit.    But  to  immerse  in  water 


§   23  SPRINKLING.  125 

is  not  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  nor  is  it  His  work  to 
immerse  the  mind,  hut  to  purify  the  mind  is.  Hence, 
not  an  external  union  to  the  visible  Church,  but  a  real 
union  to  the  true  and  spiritual  body  of  Christ  is  here 
meant,  one  which  is  produced  by  the  purification  of  the 
mind,  not  by  the  immersion  of  the  body.  Hence  to  de- 
scribe the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  uniting  us  to 
the  body  of  Christ,  purify  (by  the  application  of  the 
blood  of  Christ  by  the  spirit  of  God)  is  adopted  —  im- 
merse is  not."*     Beecher,  p.  28. 

But  there  is  still  another  kind  of  operation  of  the 
Spirit,  which  is  also  called  in  the  language  of  scripture, 
the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  in  which  Christ  Him- 
self is  represented  as  the  author.  The  one  "endues  with 
power  from  on  high  "  — the  other,  as  we  have  seen,  puri- 
fies and  unites  the  soul  to  Christ.  The  one  qualifies  its 
subjects,  in  a  supernatural  way,  to  speak  with  other 
tongues,  to  work  miracles,  and  to  prophesy,  and  was 
confined  to  the  Apostolic  age  of  the  Church  ;  the  other 
produces  a  death  to  sin,  a  resurrection  to  a  new  life  of 
holiness,  and  is  to  abide  in  the  church  as  a  permanent 
blessing.  This  distinction  of  spiritual  influence  must 
necessarily  be  kept  in  view,  in  order  to  avoid  confusion  in 
consulting  the  sacred  pages.  They  are  both  baptism,  and 
are  both  altogether  incompatible  with  the  idea  of  immersion. 

The  following  article  on  the  Baptism  of  the  Spirit,  is 
abridged  from  C.  Taylor's  work  entitled  "Apostolic  Bap- 
tism." 

He  says,  "  What  think  you  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ?  This  was  not  a  metaphorical  or  figurative  bap- 
tism. It  was  a  real  and  indisputable  subject  of  the  senses, 
seen  by  John  the  Baptist,  by  the  Apostles,  in  company  of 
the  one  hundred  and  twent}r,  as  is  generally  thought,  and 
by  Peter  with  his  brethren,  in  the  instance  of  Cornelius  ; 

*  See  the  tho  subject  fully  illustrated,  Chap.  vi. 


126  MODE  OF    BAPTISM.  §   23 

and  not  less  conspicuous  than  at  the  Jordan.  It  was  the 
subject  of  John's  repeated  predictions  :  Matt,  iii,  11,  "He 
shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  It  was  also  the 
subject  of  our  Lord's  repeated  prediction  :  Luke  xxiv, 
49,  *I  send  the  promise  of  my  Father  upon  you — ye 
shall  be  endued  with  power  from  on  high.''  Acts  i,  5,  '  Ye 
shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  not  many  days 
hense.'  Acts  ii,  2,  '  And  suddenly  there  came  from  Heaven 
and  appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  like  as  of  fire, 
and  it  sat  upon  each  of  them,  and  they  were  all  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost.'  The  same  occurred  in  the  case  of 
Cornelius,  Acts  x,  44,  for  Peter  says,  '  The  Holy  Ghost 
fell  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the  beginning.''  Acts  xi,  15  and 
xv,  8,  '  God  *  *  *  gave  them  the  Holy  Ghost, 
even  as  he  did  unto  us,  and  put  no  difference  between  them 
and  us,  purifying  their  hearts  by  faith.'  " 

Two  words  are  employed  to  express  their  similitude ; 
one  of  which  hosper  (like  as)  denotes  a  strict  and  exact 
similitude,  likeness,  or  conformity.  The  manner  in  which 
this  baptism  was  conferred  or  administered,  was  not  only 
distinct  from  plunging,  or  immersion,  but  it  was  abso- 
lutely inconsistent  with  that  action.  Plunging  was  an 
impossibility  in  the  administration  of  this  baptism. 

It  is  proper  to  adduce  those  synonymous  words  which 
the  sacred  Spirit  has  graciously  thought  fit  to  employ, 
for  the  purpose  of  fixing  the  sense  of  that  word  (baptizo) 
which  is  the  immediate  subject  of  investigation.  We 
waive  all  reference  to  critics  and  commentators,  however 
numerous  and  however  positive.  We  depend  on  the  New 
Testament  alone  —  on  those  writers  under  the  immediate 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  were  his  instruments  in 
explaining  spiritual  things  by  spiritual  words.  This  test 
is  a  sort  of  experimentum  crucis  to  false  propositions  (or 
doctrines).  It  has  detected  many.  Let  us  try  it  in  the 
case  before  us  : 


§   23  SPRINKLING.  127 

Luke  xxiv,  49,  "  I  Bend,  the  promise  of  the  Father  upon 

yOU  FROM  OX  HIGH." 

"I  saw  the  Spirit  descending  from  heaven,  like  a 
dove,  and  it  abode  upon  Him,"     John  i,  32. 

"  This  what  was  spoken,  I  will  pour  out  of  my  Spirit," 
Acts  ii,  2. 

"Jesus,  having  received  of  the  Father  the  promise  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  has  shed  forth  this  which  ye  now  see 
and  hear."     Acts  ii,  35. 

**  Suddenly  there  came  from  heaven  and  appeared 
wnto  them  cloven  tongues."     Acts  ii,  17. 

"  That  they  might  receive  the  Holy  Ghost ;  for  yet  He 
was  fallen  upon  none  of  them."     Acts  viii,  16. 

"Ananias  put  his  hands  on  Paul,  that  he  might  be 
filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost."     Acts  ix,  17. 

"God  anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy 
Ghost."     Acts  ix,  88. 

"  The  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all."     Acts  x,  44. 

"  The  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them,  even  as  on  us  at  the 
beginning."     Acts  xi,  15. 

"They  of  the  circumcision  were  astonished,  because  on 
the  Gentiles  was  poured  out  the  Holy  Ghost."  Acts  x, 
45. 

"  Giving  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  even  as  unto  us." 
Acts  xv,  8. 

"  The  Holy  Ghost,  which  He  sked  on  us  abundantly." 
Titus  iii,  6. 

"  The  Holy  Ghost  sent  down  from  Heaven."  1  Peter, 
i,  12. 

"  Sealed  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise."  Eph.  i, 
13. 

These  passages  give  us  as  synonymous  with  baptize : 
sending  down,  coming,  giving,  falling,  shedding,  pouring, 
sitting  or  abiding,  anointing,  filling  and  sealing. 

In  all  these  synonymous  words,  there  is  not  one  that 


H>8  MODS    OK    Il.UTiSM.  £   2^ 

raises  the  idea  of  plunging,  or  even  approaches  to  it.  Yet 
they  all  refer  to  baptism.  "  The  Apostles  shall  be  baptized 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  is  the  prediction  ;  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  poured  out  upon  them,  is  the  accomplishment.  Even 
Paul,  who  was  then  absent,  speaks  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as 
being  shed  on  him,  doubtless  at  his  baptism  ;  Acts  ix,  IT. 
Perhaps,  however,  the  instance  of  our  Lord  is  the  most 
complete,  of  baptism  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  that  wo 
have  the  veiy  height  of  certainty;  there  was  no plunging 
nor  anything  like  it.  Although  almost  all  the  synonyms 
meet  in  His  person,  as  descending ,  coming ,  falling ,  anoint- 
ing, sitting  or  abiding,  and  seeding. 

We  are  now  advanced  to  the  question,  "  Did  baptism  by 
water  resemble  baptism  by  the  Holy  Ghost?  —  and  in 
what  ?  "  That  there  must  have  been  some  resemblance  is 
certain  ;  and  the  resemblance  must  have  been  striking  ; 
for  the  Apostle  Peter,  seeing  the  Holy  Ghost  powr6d  out 
on  the  company  at  Cornelius's,  immediately  recollected  an 
allusion  to  John's  baptism  by  water.  The  Lord  said, 
"  John  baptized  with  water,  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with 
the  Holy  Ghost."  If  there  were  no  resemblance  between 
the  two  baptisms,  how  came  the  Apostle's  memory  to  be 
refreshed  with  what  he  saw  ?  How  came  he  to  lay  a  stress 
on  his  recollection,  thus  raised  and  exercised  ?  This  made 
so  strong  an  impression  on  his  mind,  that  he  adverts  to 
it  a  long  while  afterward,  Acts  xv,  8.  If  it  be  asked 
what  he  did  see  ?  I  answer,  he  saw  the  pouring  down  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  for  this  is  the  term  expressly  used  in  the 
history. 

Now  try  these  irreconcilable  propositions  by  the  sub- 
stitution of  their  synonyms.  "  J ohn 2^lunges  you  in  water  ; 
but  ye  shall  be  plunged  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  Shocking- 
abuse  of  language  and  principle  !  Try  the  other  :  "  The 
Holy  Ghost  shall  be  pjoured  upon  you  —  shed  upon  you, 
— fall  upon  you,  etc. :  as  John  pours  water,  sheds  water. 


§   24  H'KIXKLJNC.  120 

lets  fall  water,  etc,  upon  you."  "What  is  offensive  in 
this  ?  What  is  there  contrary  to  fact  ?  What  to 
decency  ?  What  to  the  analogy  of  faith  ?  What  to  the 
analogy  of  grammar  and  language  ?  Even  that  seemingly 
inappropriate  term,  anointing,  preserves  the  action  though 
it  changes  the  fluid. 

§24.     The  Language  of  Prophecv — Sprinkling; 

The  following  is  from  the  pen  of  an  anonymous  writer 
of  a  number  of  articles  upon  the  subject  of  baptism,  which 
appeared  in  the  Banner  of  Peace  : 

He  says  :  "  Sprinkling  is  the  scripture  mode  of  Chris- 
tian baptism."         *  *         * 

11  With  a  view  of  sustaining  the  proposition  with  which 
I  set  out,  I  offer,  as  a  direct  and  positive  proof,  the  pro- 
phecy of  Isaiah  (lii,  15)  :  '  So  shall  he  sprinkle  many 
nations :  the  kings  shall  shut  their  mouths  at  him.' 
These  words  are  spoken  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and 
are  in  the  context  of  that  passage  which  the  Eunuch  was 
reading  when  Philip  came  to  him.  There  is  here  an 
allusion  to  the  ancient  custom  among  kings,  to  admit  no 
one  into  their  presence  in  theiivourts,  who  was  not  freshly 
sprinkled  by  the  faithful  usher  of  the  palace.'  'At  an 
eastern  feast,  a  person  stands  near  the  entrance  with  a 
silver  vessel  (called  an  aspersorium,)  with  holes  after  the 
manner  of  a  common  watering  pot,  which  is  full  of  rose 
w^ater,  or  other  perfumed  liquids,  with  which  he  sprinkles 
the  guests  as  they  approach.  The  object  is  to  show  that 
they  are  the  king's  or  the  great  man's  guests — they  are 
under  his  protection.'  (Or  more  probably,  the  allusion 
in  this  passage  and  that  in  Ezekiel,  is  directly  to  the  mode 
of  the  Levitical  purifications,  which  were  almost  all  per- 
formed by  sprinkling,  as  emblematical  of  moral  purity  or 
cleansing,  and  as  such  will  apply  to  both  dispensations.) 


130  MODE    OF   BAPTISM.  §  24 

Tims  the  Son  of  God  intrusts  his  Disciples  to  preach  the 
gospel  to  the  nations,  and  to  sprinkle  those  who  believe, 
in  token  of  their  admission  to  his  presence,  and  to  his 
protection. —  See  Com.  Comm. 

"  The  prophet  tells  us,  '  The  kings  shall  shut  their 
mouths  at  him,'  intimating  that  when  the  King  of  kings 
causes  to  be  sprinkled  those  who  are  admitted  into  his 
presence  in  the  courts  of  Zion,  the  earthly  kings  shall  be 
ashamed  of  their  baptisms,  and  practice  them  no  more. 
This  has  been  fulfilled  by  that  portion  of  the  Christian 
Church  which  has  firmly  adhered  to  the  ancient  scripture 
mode  of  baptism,  while  so  many  have  been  carried  away 
by  immersion,  which  is  a  mere  imitation  of  the  bathing 
which,  in  certain  peculiar  cases,  accompanied  ancient 
baptism.  Some  immersionists  have  greatly  desired  to 
expunge  this  passage  from  the  Bible  ;  because,  as  they 
allege,  it  is  not  found  in  the  Greek  translation,  (the 
Septuagint.)  This  is  an  attempt  to  set  a  translation 
above  the  original.  If  in  this  instance  we  give  the  trans- 
lation the  preference,  why  should  we  not  do  the  same  in 
all  cases  throughout  the  scriptures  ?  Are  immersionists 
willing  to  do  this  ?  Then  why  claim  the  privilege  here  ? 
No  one  denies  that  the  words  are  correctly  translated  from 
the  original  Hebrew.  The  very  desire  to  expunge  the 
passage,  proves  its  secret  force  upon  the  conscience.       * 

*  *  We  may  read  the  Bible  through,  from  first  to 
last,  and  we  shall  not  find  immerse  in  it,  nor  any  word 
or  phrase  that  conveys  the  idea  in  relation  to  baptism; 
but  we  must  be  flooded  with  torrents  of  inferences,  which 
have  no  source  but  human  imagination  ;  and  when  we 
turn  to  the  very  word  spr'mkle,  used  in  reference  to  this 
very  rite  some  fifty  times,  and  a  great  number  and  variety 
of  equivalent  phrases,  it  amounts  to  nothing  ! 

"As  to  the  objection  that  this  text  is  found  in  the  Old 
testament,  it  is  sufficient  to  remark,  that  God  was  as 


§   24  SPRINKLING.  131 

true  in  the  days  of  Isaiah  as  in  the  days  of  Paul ;  and 
there  is  no  evidence  that  any  of  the  ancient  prophecies 
have  been  revoked.  Many  of  them  remain  yet  to  he  ful- 
filled, and  this  one  is  yet  fulfilling  and  still  to  he  fulfilled. 
After  due  consideration,  then,  I  offer  this  ancient  prophecy 
as  a  clear  and  positive  proof  that  the  mode  of  baptism 
under  the  administration  of  Christ  is  sprinkling,  and  if  it 
does  not  prove  that,  what  does  it  prove  ?  How  does 
Christ  sprinkle  the  nations  if  not  in  baptism  ?  And  by 
whom  if  not  by  those  whom  he  sends  out  to  preach  the 
gospel  ?  Let  the  opponent  consider  and  answer  these 
questions  before  he  rejects  the  proof,  and  let  him  notice 
that  there  is  no  inference  about  it.  There  is  a  direct  and 
positive  affirmation  made  on  the  authority  of  God. 

"  I  offer  a  second  direct  and  positive  proof  that  sprink- 
ling is  the  scripture  mode  of  baptism,  the  unequivocal 
affirmation  in  Eze.  xxxvi,  24-27.  The  words  determin- 
ing the  mode  are  in  verse  25th  :  '  Then  will  I  sprinkle 
clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean.'  The  other 
verses  stand  in  close  connection,  and  describe  the  cir- 
cumstances attending  the  sprinkling  of  clean  water  here 
foretold.  It  may  be  exceedingly  profitable  particularly  to 
consider  all  the  things  here  quoted,  and  to  compare  them 
with  other  scriptures,  that  we  may  understand  them 
clearly.     It  may  be  remarked  then  : 

1.  ''That  this  passage  is  a  prophecy  of  what  God  will 
do  for  the  children  of  Israel  at  the  beginning  of  the  mil- 
lennium. In  the  words,  'then  will  I  sprinkle,  etc.,  the 
particle  '  then  '  refers  to  the  time  specified  in  verse  24 : 
1 1  will  take  you  from  among  the  heathen,  and  gather  you 
out  of  all  countries,  and  will  bring  you  into  your  own 
land.'  This  is  the  time  when  God  '  will  sprinkle  clean 
loater '  upon  them.  This  prophecy  is  evidently  not  yet 
fulfilled  ;  for  Israel  are  yet  scattered  among  the  nations, 
and  their  own  land  is  yet  a  waste,  and  their  cities  are  yet 


132  MODS    OF    BAFH8M.  §  24 

in  ruin.  Lut  in  verse  32.  Ave  are  told,  '  h\  the  day  that 
I  shall  have  cleansed  you  from  all  your  iniquities,  I  will 
also  cause  you  to  dwell  in  the  cities,  and  the  wastes  shall 
he  huilded.'  See  also  verse  30.  The  cleansing  here 
spoken  of,  is  expressly  declared  in  verse  25,  to  be  one  by 
sprinkling  clean  water  upon  them  ;  and  the  fulfillment  is 
set  for  the  time  of  the  return  of  Israel  to  rebuild  their 
ancient  cities,  and  to  inhabit  again  the  land  which  God 
gave  to  their  fathers.  This  will  take  place  at  the  time  of 
the  great  destructive  battle  at  the  commencement  of  the 
millennium.  (See  Eze.  xxxviii  and  xxxix  chapters, — 
especially  verses  39,  25,  29.)  At  this  time  God  will  cause 
the  ancient  Israeli tish  nation  to  be  sprinkled  with  clean 
water,  as  a  symbol  of  cleansing  them  'from  all  their 
iniquities  ;  '  and  if  the  language  does  not  describe  Chris- 
tian baptism,  it  cannot  be  described."  *  *  * 
2.  If  we  compare  these  words  with  Heb.  x,  22,  there 
will  be  no  place  left  for  a  single  doubt  to  occupy.  Paul 
says,  ''Let  us  draw  near  with  a  true  heart,  in  full  assu- 
rance of  faith,  having  our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil 
conscience,  and  our  bodies  washed  with  pure  water.' 
Here  let  it  be  remembered  that  a  cleansing  is  exactly  equal 
to  an  effectual  washing.  Ezekiel  speaks  of  cleansing,  and 
Paul  of  washing.  Then  evidently,  they  speak  of  the  same 
thing.  Ezekiel  has  "clean  water,"  and  Paul  "pure 
water,"  and  the  Greek  word  katharos,  is  the  same  in  both 
—  only  a  different  rendering  of  the  same  word.  Then 
again,  Ezekiel  speaks  of  a  cleansing  "  from  nlthiness  — 
from  idols,  and  from  all  your  iniquities,"  and  Paul  speaks 
of  cleansing  "  from  an  evil  conscience,"  and  "  from  dead 
works"  to  serve  the  living  God.  It  is  plain  then  that 
Ezekiel  and  Paul  both  meant  to  describe  the  same  thing  ; 
and  they  both  mention  sprinkling  as  the  thing  which  is 
done  to  effect  what  the  one  calls  cleansing,  and  the  other 
calls  washiny. 


§  24  spRi^ELixa.  133 

"  Our  brethren  of  the  school  of  immersion  often  quote 
the  passage  from  Paul  in  proof  of  immersion,  and  their 
reliance  hangs  on  the  word  wash;  but  we  see  what  an 
idle  conceit  this  is,  when  Ezekiel  describes  a  cleansing, 
which  is  evidently  the  same  with  a  washing,  as  done  by- 
sprinkling.  Baptism  is  not  a  literal,  but  a  symbolical 
cleansing.  Few  will  contend  that  the  very  water  itself 
does,  or  can,  cleanse  or  wash  the  soul  from  sin.  Then  it 
is  a  mere  symbol  of  cleansing ;  and  the  administration  of 
baptism  is  an  instructive  and  affecting  ceremony,  and  not 
a  real  washing  from  iniquity  and  sin.  But  an  examina- 
tion will  prove  that  all  the  symbols  of  cleansing  from 
sin,  which  God  appointed  and  honored  of  old,  were  per- 
formed by  sprinkling,  during  the  Levitical  dispensation  ; 
and  the  same  idea  is  brought  down  in  the  baptismal 
cleansing  of  the  New  Testament  dispensation. 

3.  Ezekiel  here  connects  sprinkling,  not  only  cleans- 
ing from  filthiness,  idols,  and  all  iniquity  ;  but  according 
to  the  style  of  the  New  Testament,  he  also  connects  it 
with  the  gift  of  a  new  heart,  the  putting  of  a  new  heart 
within  them  ;  taking  away  the  hard,  stony  heart  ;  giving 
them  a  heart  of  flesh,  causing  them  to  walk  obediently  in 
God's  statutes  in  a  new  life  ;  God  becoming  their  God 
and  Protector,  taking  them  to  be  His  people,  and  forgiv- 
ing their  sins.  No  one  can  fail  here  to  recognize  the 
same  things  connected  with  EzekiePs  sprinkling,  which 
are  found  in  the  New  Testament  connected  with  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptism.  The  sprinkling  here  foretold,  is  placed 
in  striking  connection  with  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
as  it  is  in  the  New  Testament.  The  words,  "  And  I  will 
put  my  Spirit  within  you,"  cannot  be  misunderstood. 
How  strikingly  like  the  words  of  Pentecost !  "  And  they 
were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  Christ  fulfilled  the 
promise  of  baptizing  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  filling  His 
disciples    with  His  Divine  Spirit ;  and  Ezekiel  foretells 


134  MODE    OF    BAPTISM  §  24 

the  sprinkling  of  the  Jews  in  connection  with  putting 
the  Divine  Spirit  within  them.  What  is  the  difference 
between  putting  the  Spirit  of  God  within  a  people,  and 
rilling  them  with  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  Indeed,  the  whole 
thing,  as  presented  by  Ezekiel,  is  just  equal  to  a  prophecy 
of  a  second  Pentecost  to  the  Israelites ;  whereas,  as  surely 
as  God's  Word  is  true,  they  will  be  sprinkled  with  clean 
water,  to  wash  away  in  the  scriptural  sense  of  baptism. 
Then,  we  ask,  what  will  this  sprinkling  be  for,  unless  to 
baptize  them  ?  And  if  God  will  cause  them  to  be  sprink- 
led with  clean  water,  to  wash  away  their  "iilthiness, 
their  idols,  and  all  their  iniquity,"  then  it  is  perfectly  clear 
that  sprinkling  is  the  scriptural  mode  of  baptism  ;  be- 
cause God  will  certainly  not  baptize  in  an  unscriptural 
manner.  But,  if  sprinkling  will  be  God's  mode  of  bap. 
tism  at  the  beginning  of  the  millennium,  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  but  it  is  now,  and  ever  has  been,  the 
proper  mode. 

4.  "I  remark,  that  the  '  clean  water '  of  Ezekiel's 
cleansing,  and  the  *  pure  water  '  of  Paul's  washing,  both 
allude,  most  evidently,  to  the  ancient  '  water  of  purifica- 
tion for  sin;'  which  was  also  called  the  'water  of  sprinkling,' 
the  'water  of  separation,' etc.  The  same  word  in  its 
verbal  and]  nominal  inflections^is  used  in  the  Septuagint, 
in  the  text  from  Ezekiel,  and  in  the  writings  of  Moses, 
where  the  '  water  of  purification  '  is  mentioned,  and  by 
the  Apostle  Paul,  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  chapters  of  He- 
brews. It  was  called  the  '  water  of  purification,'  or  'pure 
water,'  because  it  was  appointed  as  a  pre-eminent  symbol 
of  cleansing  from  sin  and  all  uncleanness.  In  its  pre- 
paration, the  ashes  of  a  red  heifer  were  chosen  with  special 
reference  to  the  great  atonement.  God,  by  the  mouth  of 
a  prophet  and  an  Apostle,  presents  us  with  a  view  of  the 
baptism  of  the  Xew  Testament,  in  the  express  words  and 
distinctive  and  specific  form  of  sprinkling.     The  water  of 


§   25  SPRINKLING.  [35 

purification  is  the  pure  water  that  washes  our  "bodies  ;  and 
by  the  express  requirement  of  law,  (as  seen  in  the  above 
cited  passages,)  it  could  he  applied  in  no  other  mode  hut 
sprinkling.  And  for  this  there  is  a  reason  ;  for  in  no 
other  mode  could  it  symbolize  the  atonement,  which  really 
cleanses  the  soul  from  guilt.  This  very  identical  sprink- 
ling of  the  pure  water  in  Num.  19,  Paul  calls,  Heb.  ix,  10, 
13,  one  of  the  divers  washings,  or  baptisms  of  the  former 
dispensation  ;  and  exhorts  believers  to  the  same  mode 
of  washing  their  bodies,  in  drawing  near  to  God,  in  full 
assurance  of  faith  ;  and  Ezekiel,  using  the  same  word 
Jcatharos,  tells  us  the  same  sprinkling  is  to  go  on  through 
the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit  in  the  latter  day  glory. 

In  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  shall  every  word 
be  established  ;  and  are  they  not  here  ?  And  now,  I  ask 
in  the  name  of  faith,  reason  and  common  sense,  —  in  the 
name  of  God  and  the  Bible,  I  ask  —  what  is  the  use  of 
troubling  the  ;  world  with  inferences  of  immersion  from 
John  in  Jordan,  when  we  have  the  express  testimony  of 
two  inspired  witnesses  —  a  prophet  and  an  Apostle — ■ 
both  declaiming  in  so  may  words,  that  sprinkling  '  pure 
water  '  is  XewJTestament  baptism."    - 

§  25,     Use  of  the  Prepositions  —  Sprinkling. 

We  are  able  to  construct  an  argument  in  favor  of 
sprinkling  as  the  primitive  mode  of  baptism,  upon  the 
use  of  the  prepositions  in  connection  with  the  word  baptizo, 
and  its  synonym,  katharizo. 

There  are  certain  prepositions  employed,  both  in  the 
Xew  Testament  and  in  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  in 
immediate  connection  with  baptizo  and  katharizo,,  when 
speaking  of  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  which  require  the 
sense  purify,  and  altogether  preclude  the  possibility  of  the 
idea  immerse  from  being  at  all  in  the  mind  of  the  writers. 


130  MODE    OF     BAPTISM.  §  25 

They  are  dia,  en,  ek,  apo,  etc.  We  find  baptism,  dia,  by 
fire,  by  tears,  hy  martyrdoms,  by  blood,  by  water.  Not 
immersion,  en,  in  lire,  in  tears,  in  martyrdom,  etc.  And 
we  find  baptism,  apo  or  ek,  from,  or  by  the  Spirit,  or 
water,  or  lire.  Not  immersion,  en,  in  the  Spirit,  or  in 
water,  or  in  fire.  Several  of  the  prepositions  follow 
baptizo,  or  katharizo,  and  make  good  sense  and  good 
grammar,  while  but  few  will  follow  the  words  dip,  plunge, 
immerse,  (perhaps  only  two  or  three  —  en,  eis,)  without 
a  harshness,  or  even  a  contradiction  of  terms. 

It  is  admitted  on  all  sides,  that  a  great  deal  of  latitude 
is  required  in  the  use  of  the  Greek  prepositions,  and  to 
arrive  at  the  sense  of  any  une,  we  are  guided  mainly  by 
the  governing  word  with  which  it  is  connected. 

Dia,  by,  through.  It  denotes  a  cause  of  almost  any 
kind,  and  readily  interchanges  with  other  prepositions  ; 
especially  with  en,  when  used  in  the  instrumental  or  causa  - 
tive  sense. 

En,  in,  with,  by.  It  is  often  taken  in  the  instrumental 
or  causative  sense,  and  is  equivalent  to  dia.  It  occurs  in 
Matt,  iii,  11,  "  I  indeed  baptize  you,  (en)  with  water  ; 
but  he  shall  baptize  you  (  en  )  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
(  en  )  with  fire."  Now,  if  the  doctrine  of  immersion 
were  true,  en  would  be  correctly  rendered  in,  or  into, 
which  is  probably  the  more  common  meaning  of  this 
particle  :  "  But  the  latter  clause  of  this  verse  shows  the 
impropriety  of  such  a  rendering  here,  for  the  baptism  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  clearly  an  application  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  to  the  soul  of  the  believer.  And  immersion  in  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  such  a  palpable  absurdity,  that  but  few 
will  contend  for  it. 

"  How  simple  and  natural  the  sentiment  of  John  :  '  I 
indeed  purify  you  with  water,  but  He  shall  purify  you 
with  the  Holy  Spirit.,'  I  perform  an  external  and  sym- 
bolical rite,  by  which  the  body  is   cleansed  with  water  ; 


§  26  fePRlMiLlXG;  1?.'' 

but  He  shall  perform  a  higher  cleansing,  or  that  Ly  which 
the  mind  itself  is  purified  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  And 
how  harsh,  how  forced,  how  unnatural,  to  say,  I  immerse 
you  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  fine,  such  a  use  of  language 
to  denote  purification,  is  entirely  foreign  to  all  the  laws 
of  the  human  mind. 

"  Indeed,  so  much  is  the  force  of  this  felt,  that,  in  this 
part  of  the  antithesis,  many  resort  to  a  new  modification 
of  the  idea,  and  maintain  that  it  means  to  '  imbue  largely, 
to  overwhelm  with  Divine  influences/  It  would  then 
read,  '  I  indeed  immerse  you  in  water  ;  but  He  shall 
imbue  you  largely  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire.' 
But  this  destroys  the  whole  symmetry  of  the  antithesis. 
John  does  not  mean  to  say,  I  imbue  you  largely  with 
water  ;  but  either  I  immerse  you  in  water,  or,  I  cleanse 
you  with  water ;  and  which  ever  sense  we  adopt  in  one 
part  of  the  antithesis,  we  ought  to  retain  in  the  other  part 
of  it. 

"  But  when  the  agent  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  object  the 
human  spirit,  the  means  spiritual,  and  the  end  purity,  the 
sense  immerse  is  out  of  the  question.  Purify,  then,  in 
any  view  of  the  subject,  must  here  be  the  sense ; "  and 
the  instrumental  or  causative  sense  of  en,  in  this  passage, 
as  equivalent  to  dia,  is  fully  justified. 

The  fact  that  en  here  follows  baptizo,  and  that  in  itself, 
it  can  be  rendered  either  by  or  in,  emboldened  Dr.  Carson 
to  claim  that  the  sense  is  immerse  in  water  and  in  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Against  this  view  Eusebius  of  Cesarea 
expressly  testifies.  He  first  declares  that  purification  with 
or  by  the  Spirit  (  Isa.  iv,  4,  )  does  not  differ  in  sense  from 
baptism  with  or  by  the  Spirit,  as  used  by  John,  and  then 
adds  :  "In  the  one  case,  (  Isa.  iv,  4,)  fiery  words,  power- 
fully affecting  them,  wrought  in  them  a  purification  from 
sin.  In  like  manner,  it  is  said  that  the  Saviour  would 
purify,  baptize,  not  with  water,  but  with   the  Holy  Gho^t, 

12 


138  Mode  of  BArrtsM  |  26 

and  mhM  lire."  Nothing  can  bo  more  explicit*  He  thus 
removes  the  ambiguity  of  en  after  baptizo,  and  gives  to 
the  dative,  (  case  of  the  noun  )  preceded  by  en,  the  same 
causative  sense  which  is  indicated  by  dia,  and  the  geni- 
tive, (  case  of  the  noun.)  Thus  are  our  translators 
defended  for  rendering  the  passage,  "  I  indeed  baptize 
with  water,  but  he  shall  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost;" 
instead  of  (immerse  in  water,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  as 
Dr.  Carson  claims. 

Again  :  "  The  causative  sense  of  en  is  no  less  clearly 
established  by  1  Cor.  xii,  13.  By  (  en  )  one  Sjfirit  have 
we  all  been  baptized  into  one  body."  "  In  all  the  context 
of  this  passage,  the  Spirit  is  represented  as  an  active, 
intelligent,  Divine  person,  by  whom  wisdom,  faith,  and 
spiritual  gifts  are  bestowed  ;  and  en  and  dia  are  inter- 
changed as  equivalents*  To  one  is  given,  dia,  by  the 
Spirit  the  word  of  wisdom ;  to  another,  gifts  of  healing, 
en,  by  the  same  Spirit.  All  these  things  worketh  that 
one  and  self-same  Spirit,  dividing  to  every  one  as  He 
will."  After  this  comes  the  assertion,  "By  one  Spirit 
have  we  all  been  baptized  into  one  body;"  that  is,  of 
necessity,  purified,  and  then  united  in  one  spiritual  body  ; 
not  immersed  into  one  body  —  immersion  into  a  body  is 
absurd." 

Apo,  from,  and  ek,  out  of,  from  by,  are  directly  opposed 
to  the  idea  of  immersion.  Apo  occurs  in  the  baptism  of 
Paul  —  Acts  xxii  16  —  "Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and, 
apolousai,  wash  away  thy  sins."  And  in  1  Peter,  iii,  21, 
Peter  says,  "Baptism  is  not,  apothesis,  the  putting  away 
the  filth,  of  the  flesh,"  etc.  And,  Rev.  i,  5  :  "  Unto  Him 
that  washed  us,  apo,  from  our  sins,"  etc.  And,  Siraeh, 
xxxi,  25  :  "  He  that  is  baptized,  apo,  from  a  dead  body," 
etc.  In  all  these  passages  the  sense,  to  purify,  which 
is  signified  by  baptism,  suits  the  preposition  apo,  but  im- 
merse does  not.     It  is  perfectly  natural  to  speak  of  putting 


§  26  SPRINKLING.  139 

x>ff,  washing  away  sins,  and  of  washing  us  from  our  sins, 
and  of  purifying  or  cleansing  from  a  dead  body  ;  but  not 
of  immersing  aioay  sins,  or  of  immersing  from  our  sins, 
or  /rom  a  dead  body. 

I  will  here  add,  that  Basil,  one  of  the  Fathers,  in  comment- 
ing on  Isa.  iv,  4,  employs  ek  after  baptisma,  a  preposition 
at  war  with  the  idea  immerse.  For  we  are  not  immersed 
(  ek, )  ont  of,  or  from  water,  but  (  en  )  in  water  ;  but  we 
are  purified  (  ek  )  by  the  water,  and  (  ek  )  by  the  Spirit ; 
vk  denoting  that  from  which  the  '  purification  proceeds, 
—  Extracts  from  Dr.  Beecher. 

.§  26  Baptism  of  Blood,  of  Fire,  of  Tears,  and  of 
the  Truth, 

The  Fathers  also  speak  of  a  baptism  by  blood,  or  mar- 
tyrdom, of  a  baptism  by  tears,  ef  a  baptism  by  fire,  and 
of  a  baptism  by  the  truth  ;  all  of  which  are  in  open  oppo- 
sition to  the  idea  of  immersion. 

1.  The  baptism  of  blood  alludes  to  the  sufferings  and 
death  of  Christ,  and  to  the  sufferings  and  death  of  the 
martyrs.  The  Fathers  apply  the  word  baptism  merely  to 
the  act  of  making  an  atonement  by  shedding  blood;  even 
when  no  one  is  spoken  of,  either  as  sprinkled  by  it,  or 
immersed  in  it,  and  when  the  only  external  act  is  totally 
at  war  with  the  idea  immerse,  In  cases  of  this  kind,  no 
sense  is  possible  but  katharismos,  (  purification,)  which 
is  the  established  sacrificial  term  for  an  atonement,  as  we 
have  already  seen.  Christ  shed  His  blood  for  sin,  and 
this  is  called  katharismos  in  the  Word  of  God  —  Heb.  i, 
3.  Now,  if  they  call  the  mere  act  of  shedding  his  blood 
a  baptism,  it  is  totally  impossible  that  it  should  be  taken 
in  any  except  the  sacrificial  sense. 

O.igen,  speaking  of  Luke  xii,  50:  "But  I  have  a 
baptism  to   be  baptised   with,"    says.   "Our   probation 


140  MODI    OF     BAPl'l-M.  §  26 

extends,  not  only  to  strife,  but  to  the  shedding  of  blood  ; 
for  Christ,';  whom  we  follow,  shed  His  blood  for  our 
redemption,  in  order  that  we  might  leave  this  world  washed 
in  our  own  blood.  For  it  is  the  baptism  of  blood  alone 
which  renders  us  more  pure  than  the  baptism  of  water. 
Nor  do  I  say  this  presumptuously,  but  the  Scripture 
authorizes  it,  by  the  statement  of  our  Lord  to  His  disciples: 
"  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptized  with,  which  ye  know 
not."  You  see,  therefore,  that  He  called  the  shedding  of 
His  blood  a  baptism."  He  also  uses  dia  (  by,)  after 
baptisma,  as  do  others,  so  as  to  render  impossible  the 
idea  immersion.  The  perfect  baptism  by  the  mystery  of 
His  sufferings.'  And  so  does  John  of  Damascus :  "  The 
baptism  by  blood  and  martyrdom,  by  which  Christ  puri- 
fied Himself  for  us."  And,  again  :  <k  The  baptism  by 
martyrdom  and  blood." 

As  to  the  case  of  the  martyrs,  it  is  worthy  of  remark, 
"That  the  religion  of  Christ  began  with  a  solemn  act  of 
martyrdom  —  even  that  of  the  Son  of  God.  Both  by  His 
example,  and  also  by  His  spirit-stirring  words,  He  pro- 
vided powerful  motives  to  excite  His  disciples  to  meet 
death  in  its  most  terrific  form.  These  motives  were  not 
only  effectual  in  multitudes  of  instances,  but  the  minds  of 
the  early  Christians  were  so  deeply  affected,  and  so  highly 
excited  on  the  subject,  that  soon  they  went  even  to  the 
extreme  of  undue  eagerness  for  such  a  death.  And  this 
disposition  was  increased  by  a  false  construction  put  on 
the  wTords  of  Paul ;  *  I  am  ready  to  be  offered.'  '  Yea, 
and  if  I  be  offered  up.'  Also,  of  the  words  of  Christ, 
'  Can  you  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  wherewith  I  am 
baptized  ?  '  which  they  understood  as  :  Can  ye  be  purified 
with  the  purification  wherewith  I  am  purified?  and 
regarded  as  an  inquiry,  whether  they  were  ready  to  be  puri- 
fied in  their  own  blood,  as  He  was  in  His  ?  Hence  they 
ascribed  to  the  death  of  a  martyr  a  kind  of  atoning  power, 


§  26  51iu:>kuxg.  141 

and  spoke  of  it  as  a  purification,  or  baptism,  in  the  sacrifi- 
cial sense.  And  hence,  too,  the  universal  idea  of  a  bloody 
baptism  was,  that  the  martyr  was  purified  or  purged  from 
sin  by  his  own  blood.  Now  the  correctness  of  their  vieWs 
is  not  the  question.  They  were  evidently  false.  Our  only 
inquiry  is  :  In  what  language  were  they  expressed  ?  The 
answer  is  as  before ;  baptizo  and  baptisma  are  freely  used 
to  denote  the  act  of  purifying,  or  purging  from  sin,  by 
the  shedding  of  blood  ;  and  that  in  such  circumstances, 
that  all  attempts  to  introduce  the  idea  of  immersion  are 
vain, 

2.  In  speaking  of  the  baptism  of  fire,  the  Fathers 
regarded  it,  not  as  immersion,  but  as  a  purification  or 
purgation,  and  from  this  use  the  idea  of  a  future  purga- 
tory, doubtless  came.  A  few  regarded  the  fire  spoken  of 
in  the  words,  "  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  with  fire,"  as  referring  to  future  punishment,  as  some 
do  even  now.  But  others  of  them  regarded  it  as  the 
purifying  fire  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Others  believed  in  a 
literal  fire  of  purification  after  death,  particularly  Origen. 
In  Horn.  24,  on  Luke  iii,  16,  he  speaks  of  Jesus  as  purify- 
ing in  a  river  of  fire,  each  one,  who  after  death  and  before 
entering  Heaven,  needs  to  be  purged.  In  Horn.  2,  on  Jer. 
he  says,  "Therefore  Jesus  also  baptizes  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  with  fire.  Not  because  He  baptizes  the  same 
person  with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  with  fire,  but  because  he 
who  is  holy  is  baptized  with  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  but  he  who 
turns  to  sin  after  professing  his  faith  and  submitting  to 
God,  is  purified  (baptized)  by  the  torments  of  fire. 
Blessed  is  he  who  has  received  the  purification  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  does  not  need  the  purification  (baptism) 
of  fire.  Miserable  is  he,  and  deserving  of  tears,  who, 
after  the  purification  of  the  Spirit,  needs  to  be  purified 
(baptized)  with  fire."  Again:  "The  sinner  who  needs 
the  baptism  of  fire,  who  is  purged  by  burning."     And 


142  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  26 

again,  **  That  the  fire  of  Gehenna  may  purify  (baptize) 
him  hj  torments,  whom  neither  the  Apostolical  doctrines 
nor  the  evangelical  truths  purified,  according  to  that  which 
is  written  :  '  I  will  purify  thee  with  fire,  in  order  to  make 
thee  pure.'  "  Clearly  they  had  in  mind  the  words  of 
Malachi,  "He  is  like  a  refiner's  fire,'*  and  ''He  shall 
purify  and  purge."  Taking  the  word  baptizo  in  this 
sense,  there  is  no  fact  clearer  than  that  the  idea  immerse 
was  entirely  foreign  to  the  minds  of  the  Fathers,  when 
speaking  of  the  baptism  by  fire." 

3.  In  speaking  of  the  baptism  of  tears,  the  Fathers 
regard  it  as  a  purification  by  tears,  and  not  as  an  immer- 
sion in  tears.  The  very  nature  of  the  case  shows  that  it 
must  have  been  so,  and  the  language  of  the  Fathers  proves 
that  the  purifying  power  of  tears  did  not  depend  on  hav- 
ing a  quantity  sufficient  for  an  immersion.  Says  Nilus, 
"The  tears  of  prayer,"  not  a  flood,  or  river,  or  ocean  of 
tears  —  "the  tears  of  prayer  is  a  good  wash-basin  of  the 
soul."  For  this  use  of  louter  (wash-basin)  see  sec.  16, 
and  the  idea  there  given  of  washing  the  hands  of  the  soul. 
So  Gregory  Nyss  calls  tears  u  a  domestic  washing-place, 
and  fountain  of  your  own,  by  means  of  which  you  can 
wash  off  the  pollution  of  your  soul."  Aponipto,  as  no 
one  can  deny,  never  denotes  immersion,  but  commonly  the 
washing  of  hands  and  feet.  From  the  nature  of  the  case 
then,  as  well  as  from  the  language  of  the  Fathers,  we  are 
certain  that  they  regarded  the  baptism  of  tears,  not  as  an 
immersion,  but  as  a  purification. 

4.  The  Fathers  also  speak  of  the  baptism  of  the  truth, 
and  consequently  regarded  it  as  a  purifying  agent ;  and 
as  such,  as  standing  in  intimate  connection  with  the 
ordinance  of  baptism,  and  as  indicative  of  moral  purity ; 
but  not  of  immersion,  which  of  itself,  is  as  much  indica- 
tive of  pollution,  as  it  is  of  purification.  And  as  I  am 
not  provided  with  quotations  directly  from  the  Fathers 


§   26  SFRIXELING.  14o 

upon  this  part  of  the  subject,  I  will  merely  give  the  sub- 
stance of  their  views,  as  they  incidentally  appear  in  their 
Writings  ;  which  by  the  by,  are  more  orthodox  in  this 
case  than  usual. 

One  of  the  main  texts  upon  the  subject  is  Eph.  v,  25- 
27,  where  the  Apostle  represents  Christ  as  loving  the 
Church,  and  giving  himself  for  it,  "  That  he  might  sanc- 
tify and  cleanse  it,  with  the  washing  of  water,"  by  the 
word,  etc.  This  beautiful  passage  is  commonly  viewed 
as  alluding  to  the  external  washing  of  baptism,  by  the 
formal  habit  of  mind  inseparable  from  the  belief  of  immer- 
sion, though  the  washing  is  expressly  declared  to  be  by 
the  word;  and  the  spiritual  signification  of  water  is  entirely 
overlooked,  though  God  has  expressly  used  it  as  a  symbol 
of  truth  :  "I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  ye,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean,"  etc.  That  purification  was  the  primary 
idea  in  the  minds  of  both  the  Prophet  and  the  Apostle,  is 
clear  from  these  texts  themselves  ;  and  that  the  purity 
desired  was  to  be  effected  by  the  belief  of  the  truth,  is  also 
evident,  from  other  passages.  The  Saviour  said  to  the 
Disciples,  (John  viii,  32)  :  '*  And  ye  shall  know  the 
truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free." 

A  lively  writer  *  remarks  upon  this  subject  :  "  Neither 
the  Church  nor  the  world  is  taught  to  expect  any  spiritual 
good,  but  through  the  medium  of  spiritual  truth.  The 
truth  occupies  a  prominent  place  in  the  intercession  of 
Christ  for  his  people,  when  he  prayed,  '  Sanctify  them 
through  thy  truth,  thy  word  is  truth ;  '  and  the  Holy 
Spirit  describes  Christians  as  being  'begotten  by  the 
word  of  truth  ;  '  as  '  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed, 
but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  word  of  God  ; '  and  as  having 
purified  their  souls  in  obeying  the  truth.''  " 

In  this  view  of  the  baptism  of  the  truth,  we  are  entirely 
at  a  loss  to  discover  any  idea  of   immersion  whatever. 
*Dr.  Jenkyn.  of  England, 


144  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  g  26 

True  there  is  a  "  washing  of  water,"  and  a  "  sprinkling 
of  clean  water/'  brought  to  view  ;  but  that  very  washing, 
that  very  sprinkling,  is  effected  by  the  word  or  truth  of 
God,  which  liveth  and  abideth  forever.  But  there  can 
be  no  possible  immersion  in  the  truth. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  Fathers  speak  of  the  sufferings 
and  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  martyrs,  of  a  purgation  by 
fire,  and  the  affusion  of  tears,  and  the  reception  of  the 
truth  or  word  of  God  ;  and  that  they  regarded  them  all 
as  baptisms  ;  but  these  "  divers  baptisms,"  from  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  stand  diametrically  opposed  to  all  idea 
of  immersion.  The  prevailing  idea  with  the  Fathers  is 
that  of  a  purification  in  every  instance  ;  but  an  immersion 
in  blood,  in  fire,  in  tears,  or  in  the  truth,  is  a  palpable 
absurdity. — Extracted  mostly  from  JSeecher,  pp.  63-68, 
77-79. 


THE  MODE  OF  BAPTISM 


CHAPTER  V. 

Historical  Facts  Illustrative  of  the  Mode  of  Bap- 
tism. 

This  chapter  is  extracted  chiefly  from  the  able  work  of 
Dr.  Peters.  The  former  one  brings  the  direct  argument 
upon  the  mode  of  baptism  to  a  close  ;  but  the  historical 
facts  and  illustrations  contained  in  this,  drawn  from  the 
practice,  of  the  Apostles  and  early  Christian  Fathers,  go 
far  to  strengthen  and  confirm  the  argument  for  the  mode 
of  baptism  by  sprinkling. 

"  All  the  questions,"  says  Dr.  Peters,  "  that  have  been 
raised  as  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  resolve  themselves  into 
this  one :  Is  the  water  to  be  applied  to  the  person,  or  is 
the  person  to  be  applied  to  the  water  ?  Shall  the  water 
be  poured  or  sprinkled  on  the  person,  or  must  the  person 
be  dipped  or  immersed  into  the  water  ?  This  is  the  ques- 
tion ;  and  I  maintain  that  the  applying  of  the  water  to 
the  person  is  the  only  mode  of  baptism,  as  a  religious 
ordinance  made  known  in  the  scriptures.  My  position  is 
that  the  Bible  invariably  teaches  that  in  the  administration 
of  baptism  to  persons,  both  Jewish  and  Christian,  the 
water  was  applied  to  the  subject  of  the  ordinance,  the 
person.  Some  of  the  proofs  of  this  will  now  be  adduced." 
—  Peters,  p.  59. 

18 


146  MODE    OF     BAPTISM.  i    tl 

§  27.     Nature  and  Design  of  John's  Baptism. —  Baf- 
TiSM  of  Christ. 

"  Having  in  a  preceding  section,  referred  to  the  bap- 
tism of  John,  I  think  it  proper  to  remark  here,  that, 
besides  the  Jewish  rites  of  purification,  other  baptisms 
somewhat  peculiar  had  been  introduced,  and  were  well 
known  to  Christ  and  his  Disciples,  before  the  institution 
of  Christian  baptism  by  our  Saviour. 

"  To  say  nothing  here  of  the  Jewish  proselyte  baptism,* 
which  I  shall  have  occasion  to  consider  more  at  large 
hereafter,  the  baptism  of  John  had  already  been  com- 
menced and  concluded.  The  nature  of  this  baptism, 
therefore,  should  be  considered,  to  show  the  prevalent  use 
of  the  word  bapiizo,  at  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  last  com- 
mand to  his  Disciples.  I  do  not  now  allude  to  the  mode 
of  John's  baptism,  which  will  be  discussed  in  the  next 
section.  But  it  is  important  for  the  reader  to  have  in  his 
mind  some  accurate  views  of  the  distinctive  character  of 
this  baptism. 

"Let  it  be  understood,  then,  that  John's  baptism  was 
not  Christian  baptism.  John  began  to  preach  and  bap- 
tize six  months  before  Christ  entered  upon  his  public 
ministry.  His  baptism,  therefore,  cannot  be  supposed  to 
be  Christian  baptism,  without  involving  the  absurdity  of 
supposing  that  the  initiating  ordinance  of  the  Christian 
system  existed  six  months  previous  to  Christianity  itself. 
And  if  this  were  so,  it  would  prove  that  Christ  did  not 
institute  Christian  baptism,  which  is  also  absurd ;  for  the 
law  of  Moses  did  not  end  in  John,  but  in  Christ.  The 
legal  dispensation,  indeed,  was  in  full  force  during  all  the 

*"  Whatever  may  have  been  the  mode  of  the  Jewish  proselyte  bap- 
tism, it  should  be  remembered  that  this  baptism  was  a  mere  usage 
which  had  grown  up, and  was  not  an  institution  of  the  Mosaic  law.    Nor 

ii  it  named  in  the  scripture*.*'       i  ■> 


§   27  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  147 

time  of  John's  ministry,  and  the  personal  ministry  of 
Christ,  and  came  to  its  close  only  in  the  death  and  res- 
urrection of  the  Saviour,  after  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
Christian  baptism  was  instituted. 

"Again  :  John  baptized  his  Disciples  on  the  profession 
of  repentance. 

Christian  baptism  is  properly  administered  to  adults, 
only  in  the  profession  of  regeneration,  (Acts  xix,  4  ;  ii, 
38  ;  Gal.  iii,  27.)  The  faith  which  John  required,  was 
faith  in  a  Saviour  yet  to  come  ;  and  this  was  the  faith  of 
all  the  Jews,  who  believed  the  prophecies  of  their  own 
scriptures.  So  Paul  declares  (Acts  xix,  4,)  "John 
verily  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  repentance,  saying 
unto  the  people,  that  they  should  believe  on  him,  who  should 
come  after  him,  on  Jesus  Christ."  But  John  did  not 
baptize  in  the  name  of  Christ,  nor  in  the  name  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  If  he  had,  he  would  have  given  his  Disci- 
ples appropriate  instruction,  and  certainiy  would  have 
taught  the  people  to  know  that  he  was  not  himself  the 
Christ.  Yet  it  is  said,  (Luke  iii,  15)  :  "  All  men  mu.-ed 
in  their  hearts,  of  John,  whether  he  were  the  Christ  or 
not."  And  after  John  had  finished  his  ministry,  having 
baptized  a  large  proportion  of  the  people  of  Judea,  our 
Saviour  propounded  to  his  Disciples  the  following  ques- 
tion (Matt,  xvi,  13,  14)  :  "Who  do  men  say  that  I,  the 
Son  of  man,  am?"  And  they  said,  "  Some  say  that 
thou  art  John  the  Baptist  :  some  Elias  :  and  others, 
Jeremias,  or  one  of  the  prophets." 

Here  was  a  degree  of  prevailing  ignorance  of  Christ, 
quite  inconsistent  with  the  supposition  that  John  had 
baptized  in  his  name.  Indeed,  John  himself  appears  not 
to  have  known  the  Saviour's  person,  until  he  had  been 
several  months  baptizing  "with  the  baptism  of  repen- 
tance." Hen;-e  previous  to  the  Saviour's  baptism,  he 
expressly  declares,    "  T  knew  him  not,"  John  i,   32,  34. 


148  MODE   OF    BAPTISM.  §   2? 

And  as  to  any  recognition  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  John's 
baptism,  some  whom  he  had  baptized,  themselves  affirmed, 
(Acts  xtx,  2,  3):  "We  have  not  so  much  as  heard 
whether  there  be  any  Holy  Ghost."  So  Paul  baptized 
them  "  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  paying  no  regard 
to  their  having  been  baptized  by  John,  (Acts  xix,  5.) 
This  surely  he  would  not  have  clone,  if  the  baptism  of 
John  had  been  Christian  baptism. 

"  It  appears  then,  that  John's  baptism  was  finished 
before  the  institution  of  Christian  baptism,  and  that  it 
was  different  in  its  design  and  in  its  distinctive  character. 
It  took  place  not  under  Christ,  but  under  the  Jewish 
dispensation.  That  dispensation  continued  in  full  force 
until  the  death  of  Christ.  Then  the  veil  of  the  temple 
was  rent  in  twain,  the  great  sacrifice  for  sin  was  offered, 
and  the  typical  sacrifices  ceased.  Then  Christ  blotted  out 
the  hand-writing  of  ordinances,  that  was  against  us,  and 
took  it  out  of  the  way,  "  nailing  it  to  the  cross."  Yet 
the  baptism  of  John  was  not  strictly  a  Jewish  ordinance, 
but  rather  a  divine  ordinance  independent  of  Judaism.  It 
was  not  of  the  law,  but  was  a  specific  institution  for  a 
special  purpose  ;  and  being  peculiar  in  its  design,  it  was 
of  only  temporary  application.  It  was  an  ordinance  for 
the  time  being,  preparatory  to  the  ministry  of  Christ. 
Like  the  preaching  of  John,  and  his  ministry  in  general, 
it  was  to  '  prepare  the  way  of  the  Lord  ; '  and  like  the 
ordinances  strictly  Jewish,  it  was  done  away  in  Christ. 

"  It  may  be  remarked  also  here,  that  Christ  himself,  as 
well  as  his  forerunner,  lived  under  the  old  dispensation, 
and  was  a  strict  observer  of  the  institutions  of  Moses. 
'He  was  made  under  the  law,'  and  all  that  was  done  in 
the  Church,  previous  to  the  Saviour's  death,  belonged 
properly  to  that  dispensation.  So  the  baptism  of  the 
Saviour  by  John  was  not  Christian  baptism  ;  that  is,  it 
was  not  the  baptism  which  he  himself  afterwards  insti- 


g  27  HISTORICAL  FACTS.  149 

tuted  as  a  Christian  sacrament.  Nor  was  he  baptized  in 
his  own  name.  His  receiving  baptism  at  the  hands  of 
John,  was  evidently  one  of  his  acts  of  submission  to  the 
ordinances  then  existing  in  the  Church,  whether  strictly 
Jewish,  or  appropriate  to  the  ministry  of  his  forerunner. 
And  so  when  '  John  forbade  him,  saying,  I  have  need  to 
he  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to  me  ?  ■  he  said, 
'■  Surfer  it  to  be  so  now  ;  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfill 
all  righteousness,'  that  is,  to  fulfill  every  ordinance.  Matt. 
iii,  14,  15. 

"  Xor  did  this  baptism  of  Christ,  by  John,  partake  of 
the  nature  of  John's  baptism,  as  administered  to  others. 
It  was  not  a  baptism  *■  unto  repentance  ; '  for  Christ  had 
no  sin  to  repent  of.  It  was  not,  as  is  the  case  with  all 
others,  preparatory  to  the  reception  of  the  Saviour  ;  for 
he  was  himself  the  Saviour.  But  the  rite  here  administered 
was  peculiar  and  appropriate  to  its  adorable  Subject. 

"  Christ  was  now  in  his  thirtieth  year,  —  the  age  at 
which  by  the  appointment  of  God,  the  priests  under  the 
law,  were  to  undertake  the  duties  of  their  office.  He  was 
a  '  High  Priest,'  and  was  about  to  enter  upon  his  public 
ministry.  This  baptism,  in  his  case,  was  not,  it  could 
not  have  been  a  symbol  of  cleansing,  but  of  priestly  con- 
secration. So  Christ  exercised  the  office  of  a  priest 
during  his  personal  ministry.  It  was  in  this  character 
that  he  purged  the  temple  ;  and  when  the  Chief  Priests 
and  Elders  demanded  of  him,  by  what  authority  he  did 
these  things,  he  appealed  to  the  baptism  of  John,  for  a 
vindication  of  his  authority,  Matthew  xxi,  12,  23-27. 
If  the  Jews  had  acknowledged  the  baptism  of  John 
to  have  been  from  heaven,  he  would  doubtless  have 
silenced  them  by  saying,  '  It  was  by  that  baptism  that 
I  was  consecrated  to  my  priestly  office  ; '  for,  ■  among 
the  Jews,  what  was   done  by  an  accredited  prophet  of 


150  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  g  28 

the  Lotd,  was  1  otli  authoritative  and  irreversible."* —  Pe- 
ters, pp,  51,  57. 

§  28.  Mode  of  John's  Baptism.  —  Sprinkling. 

"  John  baptized  with  water,  and  not  into  water  ;  that  is, 
he  applied  the  water  to  the  subject,  and  not  the  subject  to 
the  water.  So  he  declares  (John  i,  31)  :  '  Therefore  am 
I'come  baptizing  with  water.'  And,  (Matt,  iii,  11,)  'I 
indeed  baptize  you  with  water — but  he  shall  baptize  you 
with  the  Holy  Ghost.'  To  evade  the  force  of  this  expres- 
sion, it  has  been  contended  by  some  Baptist  writers,  that 
the  Greek  particle  en,  here  rendered  with,  ought  to  be 
translated  into,  which  is  perhaps  the  more  common 
meaning  of  this  particle.  But  the  latter  clause  of  the 
verse  shows  the  impropriety  of  such  a  rendering  here  ; 
for  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  clearly  an  applica- 
tion of  the  Divine  Spirit  to  the  soul  of  the  believer.  It 
would  be  a  plain  perversion  of  the  passage  to  say,  'He 
shall  immerse  you  into  the  Holy  Ghost.'  So  John  says, 
'I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water,  as  Christ  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost.'     See  §  25. 

"  But  if  we  were  not  so  emphatically  told,  as  we  are  in 
these  passages,  that  John  baptized  with  water,  the  impos- 
sibility of  his  having  immersed  the  immense  multitude 
that  came  to  him,  proves  that  he  must  have  baptized  them 
in  some  other  way  ;  and  the  proofs  are  strong  and  con- 
clusive, not  only  that  he  did  not  apply  the  person  to  the 
water,  but  that  he  did  apply  the  water  to  the  person  by 
some  mode  of  sprinkling . 

"  Let  the  reader  examine  the  subject  of  John's  baptism 
as  it  is  presented  in  the  Xew  Testament,  and  see  if  we 
are  not  justified  in  this  statement.  Matthew  says  (iii,  5, 
6)  :  'There  went  out  to  him,  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea, 

i:Hibbarrl  cm  Bapti?iu.  p.  i. 


§     28  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  151 

ami  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,  and  were  baptized 
of  him  in  Jordan,  *  confessing  their  sins.'  Mark  says 
(i,  5)  :  '  There  went  out  to  him  all  the  land  of  Judea, 
and  they  of  Jerusalem,  and  were  all  baptized  of  him.' 
Luke  says  (iii,  21):  '  And  when  all  the  people  were 
baptized,  it  came  to  pass,  that  Jesns  himself,  being  bap- 
tized and  praying,  the  heaven  was  opened,'  etc. 

"Now  the  population  of  the  city  and  region  here 
described,  as  might  be  proved  by  Credible  historical  testi- 
mony, was  probably  not  less  than  six  millions.  In  the 
days  of  king  David,  a  thousand  years  before  Christ,  there 
were  in  Israel  and  Judah,  one  million  and  three  hundred 
thousand  'valiant  men  that  drew  the  sword,'  2  Sam. 
xxiv,  9.  And  this  census  was  exclusive  of  the  tribes  of 
Levi  and  Benjamin,  and  of  the  people  under  twenty  years 
old.  Reckoning  five  persons  to  every  warrior  in  Israel 
and  Judah,  which  is  a  moderate  estimate,  the  whole 
population  at  that,  time  was  more  than  six  millions.  And 
notwithstanding  the  frequent  wars  of  the  Jews,  by  which 
multitudes  were  slain,  there  is,  in  their  strong  aversion  to 
other  nations,  and  their  love  of  their  own  country,  which 
confined  them  mostly  to  Palestine,  much  to  lender  it 
probable  that  the  population  was  not  materially  dimin- 
ished in  the  time  of  our  Saviour.  The  testimony  of 
Josephus  confirms  the  probability  that  the  population  of 
the  holy  land  was  as  large  as  in  the  days  of  David. 

"  It  is  highly  probable  also,  that  a  large  proportion  of 
this  population  were  baptized  by  John.  The  representa- 
tions of  the  three  Evangelists,  which  we  have  already 
quoted,  show  this.      And   then  it  should  be  considered 

*P  The  expression  tn  Jorda*,(m  to  Jor  I  oted  by  Bap- 

i  prove  that  John's  baptism  was  by  immersion.     But  if  this  proTes 
immersion  in  the  Jordan,  a  similar  expression  (Mark  i,  4.    proves  immcr- 
*i<m  in  the  wilder ni vss  :    for  it  is  there  said,  John  was  baptfzing 
grt^rt,  ei?  \k  "-:?m<\''-    Peter*. 


|$$  KftRB   OF    lSAPl'Jbtf.  g    £8 

that  John  was  the  predicted  Messenger  sent  to  prepare  the 
way  of  Christ.     He   was  sent,  not  to  any  party  of  the 

Jews,  but  to  the  whole  .Jewish  nation.  All  parties  went 
out  to  see  and  hear  him.  There  seems  to  have  been  no 
great  division  concerning  him,  as  there  was  concerning 
Christ.  His  career  was  brief  and  popular.  Hence  our 
Saviour  testifies  of  him,  to  the  Jews  (John  v,  35)  :  l  He 
was  a  burning  and  a  shining  light ;  and  ye  were  willing, 
for  a  season,  to  rejoice  in  his  light.' 

"  But,  to  be  within  bounds,  respectable  and  learned 
writers,  as  Hibbard  and  Kurtz,  have  supposed,  that  if 
John  baptized  only  one-half  of  the  people  of  Palestine, 
say,  three  millions,  could  he  have  done  this  by  immersion  ? 

"Let  it  be  considered  that  John's  ministry  continued 
only  about  nine  months,  when  he  was  cast  into  prison 
by  Herod,  the  Tetrarch,  and  soon  after  beheaded,  at  the 
request  of  a  dancing  girl.  He  had  been  engaged  in  his 
ministry  only  about  six  months,  when  he  baptized  the 
•Saviour,  and  continued  about  three  months  after  that 
event.  And  it  is  easy  to  show  that  he  could  not  have 
employed  the  whole  of  that  time  in  baptizing. 

"  Suppose  then,  that  John  baptized,  say  three  millions 
of  people  in  nine  months.  Deduct  forty-three  sabbaths, 
in  which,  according  to  the  Jewish  observance  of  the  Sab- 
bath, it  was  unlawful  for  him  to  baptize,  and  there  are 
left  in  all,  two  hundred  and  thirty-one  days,  in  which  he 
was  perhaps  engaged  in  this  service.  Now  if  we  suppose 
him  to  have  stood  in  the  water,  and  baptized  by  immer- 
sion, six  hours  every  day,  he  must  have  immersed  two 
thousand,  one  hundred  and  sixty-four  every  hour,  thirty- 
six  every  minute,  and  more  than  one  every  two  seconds  ! 

"But  the  supposition  that  John  baptized  so  large  a 
proportion  of  the  people  as  one  half,  is  perhaps  extrava- 
gant. The  expressions  of  the  Evangelists  referred  to,  do 
cot  prove  that  he  baptized  one  half,  any  more  than  that 


g  28  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  153 

he  baptized  the  whole  population.  We  are  not  authorized, 
therefore,  to  fix  upon  any  particular  proportion.  These 
expressions,  however,  and  the  whole  history  of  John's 
ministry,  are  sufficient  to  show  that  the  multitude  whom 
he  baptized  was  very  great.  If  we  suppose  it  to  have 
been  only  one  twelfth  part  of  the  population,  still  it  was 
five  hundred  thousand,  which  would  require  him  to  bap- 
tize three  hundred  and  sixty-one  every  hour,  and  six  every 
minute. 

"  For  John,  therefore,  to  have  performed  his  baptism 
by  immersion,  was  plainly  impossible.  And  it  is  in  vain 
to  say  that  he  accomplished  his  ministry,  in  this  thing,  by 
miraculous  power ;  for  we  are  told,  that  when  Christ  was 
afterwards  at  the  very  place  '  where  John  at  first  baptized,' 
'many  resorted  to  him,  and  said,  John  did  no  miracle, 
but  all  things  that  John  spake  of  this  man  were  true.' 
John  x,  41. 

"It  is  clear  then,  that  he  could  not  have  immersed  all 
the  people  that  came  to  him.  Yet  it  is  expressly  said, 
that  he  baptized  them  all.  It  may  be  asked  whether  it  was 
not  equally  impossible  for  John  to  baptize  them,  according 
to  our  mode,  that  is,  by  sprinkling  them  one  by  one? 
Our  reply  is,  that  it  was  not  at  all  necessary  to  suppose 
that  he  baptized  them  singly.  The  Jewish  law  did  not 
require  this  ;  and  John  made  no  innovation  upon  the 
Jewish  rites.  He  simply  employed  the  custom aiy  cere- 
mony of  purification,  for  the  purposes  of  his  own  min- 
istry. Hence  the  Jews  found  no  fault  with  his  mode  of 
baptism ;  and  the  only  imaginable  reason  is,  that  he 
conformed  to  their  own  usage.  He  doubtless  took  a 
bunch  of  hyssop,  and  made  it  sufficiently  large  for  his 
purpose,  and  dipped  it  in  water,  and  sprinkled  the  people, 
as  they  came  to  him,  in  large  numbers  at  a  time.  This, 
we  have  seen,  was  the  Jewish  mode  of  purification,  which 
Paul  calls  baptism.     See  §  15,  1. 


154  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  28 

"  It  is  manifest,  also,  tliat  tlie  vast  multitude  that 
collected  around  John,  went  out  to  hear  him  preach.  They 
had  no  thought  of  being  baptized,  until  they  were  convicted, 
and  applied  for  baptism  on  the  spot.  Hence  we  are  told, 
John  i,  25,  that  the  Pharisees  asked  him,  "  Why  haptizest 
thou  then,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias,  neither 
that  Prophet  ?  They  went  out,  of  course,  without  any 
change  of  raiment.  No  one  surely  will  suppose  that  they 
were  immersed,  with  their  clothes  on,  in  these  circum- 
stances, and  there  is  no  intimation  that  they  were  denuded 
(divested  of  their  garments)  for  this  purpose.  If,  then, 
we  had  not  been  so  pointedly  informed,  as  we  are,  that 
John  baptized  this  immense  multitude,  not  into  water,  but 
with  water,  it  would  still  be  inconceivable  that  they  were 
immersed. 

"But  it  is  said,  John  iii,  2o,  that  'John  was  baptizing 
in  Enon,  near  to  Salem,  because  there  was  much  ivater 
there,'  'Why  was  this?'  say  our  Baptist  brethren. 
4  Why  did  John  choose  a  place  where  there  was  much 
water,  if  he  performed  his  baptism  by  sprinkling  ?  '  The 
question  would  be  of  some  importance,  if  it  had  been 
said  that  John  was  at  Enon  for  the  convenience  of  bap- 
tizing. But  no  such  thing  is  intimated  in  Scripture. 
The  circumstances  were  these:  John  had  been  baptizing 
c  in  Bathabara  beyond  Jordan,'  John  i,  2*.  All  his  earlier 
baptisms  had  been  performed  there  Why  did  he  leave 
that  broad  river,  and  go  to  Enon?  The  Evangelist, 
according  to  our  translation,  says,  it  was  '  because  there 
wa.>  much  water  there.'  But  there  was  more  watefr  in  the 
Jordan.  If  then,  lie  consulted  only  the  convenience  of 
baptizing  by  immersion,  there  was  no  gain  by  his  removal. 
Surely  he  was  as  -veil  accommodated  in  this  respect,  on 
the  banks  of  the  Jordan;  as  he  could  have  been  at  Enon. 

"  But  there  was  another  reason  for  his  removal,  amply 
sufficient  to  account  for  his  change  of  places.     The  Jordan 


§   28  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  155 

is  a  turbid  stream.  The  water  of  it  is  unfit  for  drink  or 
culinary  purposes,  until  it  has  stood  several  hours  in 
vessels  and  settled.  But  the  waters  of  Enon  were  pure 
rivulets  or  streams,  flowing  from  a  single  fountain  or  spring. 
The  place  has  been  identified  by  modern  travelers,  and  it 
is  plainly  seen  to  have  furnished  far  better  accommoda- 
tion than  the  region  of  the  Jordan,  for  the  encampment 
and  comfort  of  the  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  that 
attended  the  ministry  of  John.  And  the  geography  of 
the  place,  has  thrown  light  upon  the  original  expression, 
here  translated  much  water.  It  is  pola  hudota,  which 
literally  signifies,  not  much  icater,  but  many  waters,  or 
streams.  And  the  reason  is  now  plain  why  John  resorted 
thither.  He  was  perpetually  attended  by  the  greatest 
multitude  that  ever  assembled  around  a  human  being  for 
instruction.  Had  they  no  use  for  these  many  waters  ex- 
cepting for  the  ordinances  of  baptism  ?  Were  not  those 
pure  and  healthful  waters  a  great  and  almost  indispensable 
convenience  for  drinking,  and  for  culinary  and  other  pur- 
poses ?  And  did  not  their  camels,  and  horses,  and  asses 
need  water  ?  Just  such  locations  are  selected  by  those 
who  have  experience  in  camp  meetings  in  our  own  country. 
Pure  and  abundant  springs,  or  streams  of  running  water, 
is  regarded  as  indispensable  for  the  comfort  of  the  people 
and  their  beasts  of  burthen,  without  the  slightest  reference 
to  baptism  in  any  mode.  This  passage,  therefore,  proves 
nothing  as  to  the  mode  of  John's  baptism.  It  leaves  us 
free  to  presume,  that  he  baptized  in  Enon,  as  he  did  else- 
where, not  into  water,  but  with  water.  Doubtless  he 
applied  the  water  to  the  person,  and  not  the  person  to  the 
water."     Peters,  jjp.  68,  77. 


156  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  g   29 


§  29.     Baptism  of  Three  Thousand  on  the  Day  of 
Pentecost. —  Sprinkling. 

"  We  come  now  to  matters  of  fact  and  history,  as  to 
the  mode  in  which  the  Apostles  actually  did  administer 
Christian  baptism,  in  obedience  to  the  Saviour's  last  com- 
mand. 

"The  first  account  of  the  administration  of  baptism, 
after  the  ascension  of  the  Saviour,  is  that  recorded  Acts 
ii,  41,  where  it  is  said  'They  that  gladly  received  His 
word,  were  baptized :  and  the  same  day  there  were  added 
unto  them  about  three  thousand  souls.'  We  have  already 
noticed  the  prophesy  of  Isaiah,  (Hi,  15,)  in  fulfillment  of 
which  Ave  suppose  the  three  thousand  baptized  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost,  must  have  been  received  into  the  Christian 
Church  by  sprinkling.  But  setting  aside  the  prophesy 
altogether,  and  considering  the  events  of  the  lay  of  Pen- 
tecost historically,  we  are  led  to  the  same  conclusion. 

"  The  Apostles  had  no  place  for  the  immersion  of  such 
a  multitude  as  were  there  baptized.  The  Jordan  was  six- 
teen or  eighteen  miles  distant,  and  at  that  season  of  the 
year,  (June,)  the  brook  Kedron  was  nearly  or  quite  dry.* 
And  if  it  was  not  dry,  a  common  sewer  pouied  all  the 
filth  of  the  northern  portion  of  the  city  into  it,  rendering 
it  wholly  unlit  to  be  used  as  a  place  of  immersion.  Where, 
then,  could  the  Apostles  have  baptized  the  three  thousand 
converts  by  immersion  ?  These  baptisms  appear  to  have 
been  performed  on  the  spot,  as  well  as  on  f  the  same  day' 
of  their  conversion.  Where  was  the  water  for  their 
immersion?  There  was  no  river  nor  brook  to  which  they 
could  resort  in  so  short  a  time  ;  and  there  were  only  two 

*  "  This  brook  flawed  along  the  east  side  of  the  city,  was  at  best  but 
a  turbid  and  unimportant  stream,  and  was  always  dry  in  summer.  Jahn 
nforms  us,  its  channel  is  dry  except  in  winter."— Jahn  sec.  19, p.  20. 


§  29  HISTORICAL    PACTS.  157 

public  pools  or  bathing  places  in  Jerusalem,  Bethesda 
and  Siloam.  The  latter  was  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Moriah, 
three-quarters  of  a  mile  distant  from  where  the  Apostles 
were  assembled  ;  and  we  have  no  account  of  their  march- 
ing off  to  it,  with  the  thousands  that  heard  them. 

"  Bethesda  was  near  at  hand,  on  the  north-east  of  the 
temple,  but  it  was  used  daily  for  the  cleansing  of  sacrifice, 
and  the  blood  and  offals  of  the  sacrifice  and  temple  were 
washed  into  it,  which,  some  have  imagined  may  have  im- 
parted to  the  water  its  healing  virtues.  A  t  least  it  must 
have  been  unfit  for  a  place  of  immersion.  It  was  also  in 
the  hands  of  the  priests,  the  avowed  and  mortal  enemies  of 
Christ  and  His  Disciples.  They  ridiculed  the  transactions 
of  the  day,  and  said,  'these  men  are  full  of  new  wine.' 
They  surely  would  not  have  willingly  given  up  the  pool 
of  Bethesda  to  the  Apostles,  to  be  used  as  a  place  of 
Christian  baptism.  It  is  probable,  also,  that  both  Siloam 
and  Bethesda  were  of  insufficient  dimensions  to  allow  the 
eleven  apostles  to  use  them  at  the  same  time  for  the  pur- 
pose of  immersion. 

"  The  implacable  opposition  of  the  priests  and  of  the 
Jews  in  general,  must  also  have  prevented  their  making 
use  of  the  washing  lavers  of  the  temple  for  this  purpose. 
Nor  can  it  be  supposed  that  they  were  admitted  to  the 
bathing  places  in  private  houses  for  immersion  in  such 
vast  numbers.  For,  besides  the  inconvenience  and  im- 
probability of  this,  on  many  accounts,  those  bathing 
places  were  only  to  be  found  in  the  houses  of  the  rich  and 
honorable,  very  few  of  whom  at  that  time,  were  disposed 
to  befriend  the  cause  of  Christ.  Where,  then,  we  ask 
again,  could  the  Apostles  have  immersed  the  three  thou- 
sand on  the  day  of  Pentecost  ? 

"  But  the  difficulties  of  supposing  that  the  converts  on 
that  day  were  all  immersed,  are  still  greater,  if  we  consider 
that,  after  the  close  of  Peter's  sermon,  there  were  but 


158  MODE    OF     BA1TIS.U  §   29 

about  five  hours  of  the  day  remaining.  Yet  the  account 
states  that  they  were  acfcded  to  the  Church  'the  same  day.' 
But  to  have  immersed  them  all  in  five  hours,  each  of  the 
Apostles  must,  have  immersed  more  than  fifty  person* 
every  hour,  and  more  i\w\\\five  persons  every  six  minutes  ! 
This,  I  need  not  say,  would  have  been  impossible.  But 
if  the  Apostles  performed  the  rite  of  baptism  by  sprink- 
ling, according  to  the  prevalent  mode  of  purifying  among 
the  Jews,  the  three  thousand  were  baptised  in  five  hours 
with  comparative  ease. 

"  It  is  said  indeed,  that  the  seventy  Disciples  (Luke  x, 
1)  might  have  aided  on  this  occasion,  and  thus  rendered 
possible  the  baptism  of  three  thousand  by  immersion,  in 
the  time  specified.  But  it  is  nowhere  said  in  scriptitre, 
that  the  seventy  were  commissioned  to  baptize.  It  is 
certain  that  they  were  not  with  the  Apostles  at  the  time 
they  received  the  Saviour's  last  command.  Only  the 
eleven  were  then  present,  (Matt,  xxviii,  16.)  And  the 
account  of  the  day  of  Pentecost,  (Acts  ii,)  gives  us  to 
understand  very  explicitly,  that  the  seventy,  if  they  were 
present  at  all,  were  there  only  as  spectators,  taking  no 
prominent  part  in  the  ministry.  It  says  that  '  Peter, 
standing  up  with  the  eleven,  lifted  up  his  voice. '  Why 
are  not  the  seventy  mentioned,  if  they  also  took  part  in 
the  services  ?  The  truth  is,  there  is  no  evidence  or  inti- 
mation, that  they  were  there  ;  much  less  that  they  took 
part  in  the  baptism  of  the  three  thousand.  Nor  is  there 
any  degree  of  probability,  that  any  others  were  authorized 
to  take  part  in  the  administration  of  those  baptisms. 
Only  ten  days  had  intervened  since  the  Apostles  had 
received  their  own  commission  from  the  Saviour  ;  and 
we  have  no  account  of  their  having  ordained  any  person 
to  the  work  of  the  ministry  during  that  time.  On  the 
contrary,  we  are  assured  that  the  Saviour  had  commanded 
them  to  suspend  the  exercise  of  their  A]  osiolic  functions 


§  30  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  159 

until  the  descent  of  tho  Holy  Ghost,  which  took  place  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  (Luke  xxiv,  49;  Acts  i,  7,  8.) 
The  difficulties,  therefore,  in  the  way  of  immersion,  on 
this  occasion,  remain  insurmountable,  and  all  the  proba- 
bilities are  in  favor  of  the  conclusion,  that  the  three 
thousand  were  baptized  by  sprinkling. 

"The  next  account  of  the  administration  of  this  ordi- 
nance, in  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  is  the  baptism  of 
Simon  and  many  others,  both  men  and  women,  by  Philip 
the  Evangelist,  in  Samaria.  But  there  are  no  circum- 
stances here  which  indicate  the  mode.  It  is  simply  said, 
'  They  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus. : 
(Acts  viii,  12,  13,  16.)—  Peters,  pp.  84,  89. 

§  30.  Baptism  of  the  Eunuch  and  of  Christ —  Sprink- 
ling—  The  Greek  Particles  Translated  into  and 
out  of. 

"The  next  occurrence  of  baptism  was  that  of  the 
Eunuch  (Acts  viii,  38,  39)  :  '  And  he  commanded  the 
chariot  to  stand  still,  and  they  went  down  both  into  the 
water,  both  Philip  and  the  Eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him. 
And  when  they  were  come  up  out  of  the  water,  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  caught  away  Philip,  and  the  Eunuch  saw  him 
no  more.'  There  is  one  other  passage,  where  a  similar 
expression  occurs,  (Matt,  iii,  16)  :  '  Anri  Jesus  when  he 
was  baptized  went  up  straitway,' —  that  is,  immediately 
—  '  out  of  the  water.' 

"  It  would  be  out  of  place  here  to  go  into  a  criticism 
of  the  Greek  particles  here  rendered  into  and  out  of. 
They  might  with  equal  propriety  be  rendered  to  and /rom. 
They  therefore  teach  us  nothing  as  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism. They  do  not  govern  the  meaning  of  the  word 
haptizo,  which  is  used  in  connection  with  them,  in  these 
passages,  but  are  themselves  governed  by  the  meaning 


160  MODE    OK    BAPTISM.  §   3d 

which  we  attach  to  baptizo,  independent  of  them.  (See 
§25).  If,  for  instance,  I  believe,  from  other  evidences, 
that  Christ  and  the  Eunuch  were  baptized  by  immersion, 
I  should  say  that  they  went  down  into  the  water,  and 
came  up  out  of  it.  If  I  believe  they  were  baptized  by 
sprinkling,  I  should  say  to  and/rora,  instead  of  into  and 
out  of,  unless  I  supposed  that  they  stood  in  the  water, 
which  in  those  days  of  sandals,  is  perhaps  quite  probable. 
These  particles,  therefore,  are  of  no  use  in  settling  the 
question,  because  their  proper  translation  into  English, 
depends  on  the  sense  of  the  words  they  are  used  in  con- 
nection with. 

"To  show  how  the  translation  of  these  particles  must 
vary  according  to  the  sense  of  the  subject,  take  the  fol- 
lowing examples,  where  the  word  eis,  here  rendered  into, 
is  used.  Acts  xxvi,  14  :  'And  when  they  were  all  fallen 
(eis )  to  the  earth,'  not  into  the  earth  John  xi,  33  :  '  Jesus 
therefore  cometh  (eis)  to  the  tomb,'  of  Lazarus,  not  into 
the  tomb.  And  John  xx,  4,  5  :  '  The  other  Disciple  did 
outrun  Peter,  and  came  first  (eis)  to  the  sepulcher,  and 
he,  stooping  down  and  looking  in,  saw  the  linen  clothes 
lying  ;  yet  went  he  not  (eis)  in.'  Now  if  eis  necessarily 
means  into,  we  ought  to  read  the  passage  thus  :  '  The 
other  Disciple  came  first  into  the  sepulcher,'  etc.,  yet  went 
he  not  into  it,  which  would  be  absurd  and  contradictory. 
So  in  a  multitude  of  other  cases,  the  translations  of  these 
little  words  vary  with  the  sense  of  the  connection  in  which 
they  are  found.  Carson,  one  of  the  most  learned,  and  yet 
one  of  the  most  strenuous  of  the  Baptists,  says,  in  respect 
to  Matt,  iii,  16  :  '  I  admit  that  the  proper  translation  of 
apo,  is/rom,  not  out  of,  and  that  it  would  have  its  mean- 
ing fully  verified,  if  they  had  only  gone  down  to  the  edge  of 
the  water.'  page  200.  After  all  that  has  been  said,  there- 
fore, as  to  the  force  of  these  words,  into  and  out  of,  they 
prove  nothing  in  respsrt  to  the  mode  of  baptism,  and  we 


§  30  HISTORICAL    PACTS.  l6i 

are  left  just  where  we  were,  to  learn  historically  what  was 
the  fact  as  to  the  mode  of  those  baptisms.* 

"As  to  the  baptism  of  Christ  in  or  at  the  Jordan,  it 
was  performed  by  John,  and  we  have  said  enough  of 
John's  baptism  to  show  the  strongest  probability  that  it 
was  administered  by  sprinkling.  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  in  its  mode,  it  was  with  entire  accordance  with, 
the  Jewish  mode  of  purifying.  It  may  be  added  that  the 
Jews,  when  they  baptized  themselves  in  a  running  stream, 
as  they  often  did,  were  accustomed  to  kneel  down  in  it, 
and  with  their  hands  threw  the  water  back  over  their 
heads,  and  then  sprinkle  themselves.  They  do  this  still, 
as  we  are  told  by  travelers.  Here  there  is  going  down  into 
the  water,  and  coming  up  out  of  the  water,  without 
immersion.  And  to  this  day,  Jewish  pilgrims  are  often 
seen  to  go  down  to  the  Jordan,  where  Christ  was  baptized, 
and  while  they  kneel  down  in  or  by  the  river,  the  admin- 
istrator takes  up  a  little  water,  and  baptizes  them,  by 
applying  it  to  their  persons.  \  Thus  they  are  baptized 
with  water,  and  not  into   water.     Christ   was    probably 

*  It  is  a  fact  well  known  to  all  who  have  any  knowledge  of  Greek, 
that  the  rule  observed  by  the  Greek?,  in  relation  to  prepositions  con- 
nected with  verbs  of  motion  is  this  ;  When  they  wished  by  the  force  of 
the  words,  definitely  to  express  the  idea  of  going  into,  or  coming  out  of, 
any  place,  as  a  house,  a  ship,  the  kingdom,  etc.,  to  prefix  the  prepo-ition 
to  the  verb,  and  also  to  repeat  it  after  the  verb.  As  eiserchoernai  eis,  / 
go  into,  and  ekporeuomai  ek,  I  go  out  of;  or  ernbaino  eis,  to  go  into,  and 
apobaino  apo,  to  go  out  of  or  from.  Speaking  of  Paul  and  Silas  at  Phi- 
lippi,  the  writer  says  (Acts  xvi,  40)  :  ,l  Exelthontes  de  ek  tes  phulanke-\ 
eis  elthon  eis  ten  Ludian."  u  And  they  went  out  of  the  prison,  and 
entered  into  the  house  of  Lydia."  Such  a  construction  is  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  New  Testament  history,  when  there  was  an  actual 
entrance  into,  or  an  actual  passing  out  of  expressed  ;  which  would  have 
been  entirely  pertinent,  in  respect  to  the  water,  had  immersion  been  the 
mode  of  baptism  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  Still  it  is  very  remarkable, 
that  in  all  the  baptisms  recorded,  such  a  construction  does  not  occur  in 
a  single  instance. 

\  "  Rabbah  Taken,"  by  R.  W.  Landb.  p.  39. 
U 


162  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  g   3(J 

baptized  in  this  way,  according  to  the  Jewish  usage,  and 
went  up  '  [straightway  '  out  of  or  from  the  water.  If  he 
kneeled  or  stood  in  the  river,  he  went  into  the  water,  and 
came  out  of  it.  If  he  kneeled  by  the  side  of  the  river,  he 
went  only  to  the  water,  and  came  from  it.  But  the 
baptism  of  Christ,  though  performed  by  John,  probably 
in  the  ordinary  mode  of  his  baptism,  did  not.  as  we  have 
said,  (§  27,)  partake  of  the  nature  and  design  of  John's 
baptism,  as  administered  to  others.  It  was  a  consecra- 
tion to  his  priesthood  ;  the  law  (Exod.  xxix,  4,)  required 
the  following  purification  to  be  performed  in  such  cases  : 
1  And  Aaron  and  his  sons  thou  shalt  bring  to  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregations,  and  shalt  wash  them 
with  water.'  In  Num  viii,  7,  we  are  told  how  this 
washing  is  to  be  performed  :  '  Thus  shalt  thou  do  unto 
them  to  cleanse  them  ;  sprinkle  water  of  purifying  upon 
them.'  Here  then  is  another  evidence,  in  addition  to  the 
general  m  )de  of  John's  baptism,  that  Jesus  was  baptized 
by  sprinkling. 

"In  the  case  of  the  Eunuch,  the  circumstances  are 
equally  and  perhaps  still  more  conclusive,  in  favor  of 
sprinkling  as  the  mode  of  his  baptism.  Philip  was  in 
Samaria,  and  the  angel  of  the  Lord  directed  him  to  'go 
toward  the  south,  unto  the  way  that  goeth  down  from 
Jerusalem  unto  Gaza,  which  is  desert.'  It  was  on  the 
road,  in  the  desert,  that  he  met  the  Eunuch,  who  was  a 
Jew  of  Ethiopia,  and  had  been  up  to  Jerusalem  to  wor- 
ship. He  was  now  returning,  and  having  the  Jewish 
scriptures  with  him,  he  was  reading,  as  he  sat  in  his 
chariot,  in  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah.  And  the  place  where 
he  read  was  this  :  '  He  was  led  as  a  sheep  to  the  slaughter, 
and  like  a  lamb  dumb  before  his  shearers,  so  he  opened 
not  his  mouth.'  Now  turn  to  Isa.  liii,  7,  and  you  will 
find  the  very  passage  which  the  Eunuch  was  reading.  It 
is  a  part  of  the  prophet's  description  of  the  Saviour.    But 


§  30  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  l6o 

the  Eunuch  understood  it  not.  -And  so  he  said  to  Philip, 
*  I  pray  thee,  of  whom  speaketb  the  prophet  thus  ?  of 
himself  or  of  some  other  man  ■?  And  Philip  began  at 
the  same  scripture,  and  preached  unto  him  Jesus,'  He 
explained  the  prophecy,  '  and  as  they  went  on  their  way, 
they  came  to  a  certain  water  ;  and  the  Eunuch  said,  see 
here  is  water,  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptized  ?  ' 

"  Now  what  was  it  which  led  the  Eunuch  to  think  of 
being  baptized  just  at  this  time  ?  It  was  the  preaching 
of  Philip,  opening  to  him  the  scriptures  which  he  had 
been  reading.  And  it  is  remarkable  that  just  in  that 
connection,  and  only  seven  verses  before,  (Isa.  Hi,  15,)  is 
the  prophecy  on  which  I  have  already  remarked,  as  having 
been  signally  fulfilled  en  the  day  of  Pentecost  :  *  '  So 
■shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations.'  This,  no  doubt,  Philip 
had  explained  to  him.  So  far,  therefore,  as  the  mode  is 
concerned,  it  was  -sprinkling,  and  not  immersion,  which 
was  in  the  mind  of  the  Eunuch,  when  he  asked  for  bap- 
tism. And  -Jew,  as  he  was,  and  accustomed  to  this  mode 
of  purification,  what  else  could  he  have  expected,  or  hoped, 
but  to  be  baptized  in  this  way  ?  And  the  place  and  the 
•circumstances  indicate  that  he  was  thus  baptized. 

"  The  account  says  that  they  came  to  some  water.  The 
Greek  word  here  translated  certain,  is  ti,  which  does  not 
indicate,  as  the  English  reader  might  imagine,  a  well  known 
fountain  of  water.  It  means  simply  some  or  any  water, 
and  has  sometimes  the  sense  of  a  diminutive.  So  here  it 
might  be  rendered,  with  strict  propriety,  *  they  came  to 
a  little  water,'  and  the  Eunuch  exclaimed  with  evident 
emotion,  when  he  saw  it,  '  Behold  water  !  '  This  is  the 
literal  translation  of  the  original,  Behold  water  !  He  does 
not  say  how  much  water.  Nothing  is  said  about  a  river. 
It  was  a  desert,  as  we  have  seen,  and  the  Eunuch  was 

*Dr.  Peters's  idea,  alluded  to  here,  is  that  some  of  all  nations  were 
really  baptized  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 


164  modi;  Of   baptism.  §  30 

doubtless  surprised  and  pleased,  to  come  upon  any  water 
in  such  a  place.  Indeed  it  was  in  this  vicinity,  in  the 
valley  of  Gerar,  in  Which  the  city  of  Gaza  stood,  that 
Abraham  and  Isaac  were  obliged  to  dig  wells  to  get  water 
for  their  flocks ;  and  *  the  herdsmen  of  Gerar  did  strive 
with  Isaac's  herdsmen,  saying,  the  water  is  ours.'  Gen. 
xxvi,  20.  It  was  not  far  from  this  place  that  Philip 
baptized  the  Eunuch ;  and  the  water  was  probably  one  of 
those  'springs  in  the  desert,'  of  which  we  read,  (Gen. 
xxvi,  19).  Such  a  spring,  boiling  out  of  the  ground, 
was  not  likely  to  afford  a  convenient  place  of  immersion, 
and  all  the  probabilities  are  against  the  supposition  that 
the  Eunuch  was  thus  baptized. 

"  The  presumption,  then,  that  there  was  a  river  in  the 
desert,  in  which  the  Eunuch  was  immersed,  is  all  a  fancy. 
There  is  no  intimation  of  any  such  thing.  And  the 
confidence  placed  in  the  English  expressions  into  and  out 
of,  to  prove  that  he  must  have  been  immersed,  is  without 
foundation.  Besides,  if  these  expressions  prove  anything, 
they  prove  too  much  for  our  opponents.  For  the  account 
says,  '  They  went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip 
and  the  Eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him,'  thus  showing  that 
their  going  into  the  water,  was  an  action  wholly  distinct 
from  the  baptism.  If  they  went  into  the  water  at  all, 
they  were  in  the  water  before  the  baptism  was  performed. 
Their  going-  into  the  water,  then,  was  no  baptism.  If  it 
was,  then  Philip  was  baptized  as  much  as  the  Eunuch. 
Thus  all  the  circumstances  of  this  baptism,  which  has 
been  so  much  relied  on,  and  so  often  quoted  in  confirma- 
tion of  the  views  of  Immersionists,  are  found  to  support 
the  opposite  doctrine,  and  render  it  highly  probable,  if 
not  absolutely  certain,  that  the  Eunuch  was  baptized  by 
V>rinkliny."  —  Peters,  pp.  89-98. 


§  31  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  16cT 

§  31.  Other  Instances  of  Apostolic  Baptism  —  The 
Apostle  Paul,  Cornelius,  Lydia,  the  Jailer,  and 
Two  Others. — Sprinkling. 

1.   The  Baptism  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

"The  baptism  of  Saul  (or  Paul)  also,  which  is  the 
next  that  occurs  in  the  sacred  history,  (Acts  ix,  18,  and 
xxii,  16,)  sustains  the  same  conclusion,  as  to  the  mode  of 
baptism  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  The  account  says, 
that  he  was  simply  required  to  stand  up,  there  where  he 
was,  and  'he  arose  and  was  baptized.'  The  ordinance, 
as  it  appears,  was  performed  on  the  spot  where  he  stood, 
probably  by  water  drawn  from  some  '  water-pot  of  stone,' 
which  stood  there  in  the  house,  when  he  had  been  three 
days  fasting.  There  is  no  intimation,  and  no  probability 
that  he  was  plunged  into  water." 

2.   The  Baptism  of  Cornelius  and  his  Friends, 

"  In  the  case  of  Cornelius  and  his  neighbors  in  Cesarea, 
Acts  x,  47,  we  are  told  that  Peter  preached  at  his  house, 
and  many  were  present  to  hear  him.  And  it  appears  that 
they  were  all  converted.  '  The  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them.' 
Xow  to  signify  this  falling  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  them, 
our  Baptist  brethren  say,  they  must  have  been  immersed 
into  water.  But  Peter  intimates  no  such  thing.  He  does 
not  appear  to  see  any  water  there  ;  and  so  he  says,  '  can 
any  man  forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  be  baptized  ?  ' 
In  plain  English  phrase,  '  Will  some  one  be  kind  enough 
to  bring  some  water,  that  these  may  be  baptized  ?  '  Surely 
no  Baptist  minister  would  say,  on  such  an  occasion,  'Can 
any  man  forbid  water  ?  '  etc.  If  immersion  had  been  the 
mode,  Peter  would  have  said,  as  a  Baptist  would  now  say, 
'Can  any  man  forbid  us  to  go  out  to  the  river  or  pond, 


166  Mode  of  baptism.  §  31 

that  there  may  be  immersion?  '  But  Peter  said  what  any 
Congregational,  Presbyterian,  or  Methodist  minister,  in 
the  same  circumstances,  might  say,  with  the  strictest  pro* 
priety.  The  language  here  used,  therefore,  implies  that 
the  baptism  was  performed  by  the  application  of  water 
to  the  person  and  not  the  person  to  the  water." 

3.   The  Baptism  of  Lydia  and  her  Household. 

"The  case  of  Lydia  and  her  household,  Acts  xvi  13- 
15,  is  also  in  point.  The  Apostles  were  not  by  the  side 
of  a  river,  near  the  city  of  Philippi,  where  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  resort  for  prayer,  when  Lydia  attended  to  the 
things  which  were  spoken  of  Paul,  and  was  baptized. 
She  was  away  from  her  house,  and  probably  had  no  change 
of  raiment  with  her,  and  yet  she  '  was  baptized  and  her 
household.'  There  was  a  river  there  it  is  true,  in  which 
they  might  have  been  immersed,  if  that  had  been  the 
mode  of  baptism  practiced  by  the  Apostles  ;  but  there 
was  no  other  preparation  for  such  a  baptism.  Surely  the 
fact  that  they  were  'by  a  river  side,'  does  not  prove  that 
they  baptized  by  immersion,  especially  when  we  are  told 
that  they  went  there,  not  for  the  convenience  of  baptizing, 
but  because  it  was  a  place  where  prayer  was  wont  to  be 
made.'  This  and  the  other  circumstances  indicate  that 
though  Lydia  and  her  household  may  have  been  baptized 
with  the  water  of  the  river,  the  ordinance  was  probably 
performed  in  the  usual  way,  by  sprinlling ." 

4.  Baptism  of  the  Jailer  and  his  Family. 

The  bartism  of  the  Jailer  an  1  his  Family,  Acts  xvi, 
33,  34,  is  still  more  conclusive  in  illustration  of  the  mode 
of  baptism  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  All  the  circum- 
stances detailed  in  this  account,  plainly  show  that  immer- 


g  31  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  167 

sion  was  wholly  out  of  the  question.  Paul  and  Silas 
were  prisoners,  whom  the  jailer  had  been  solemnly  i  barged 
to  '  keep  safely  ;'  and  for  this  purpose,  and  in  faithfulness 
to  his  charge,  he  had  thrust  '  them  into  the  inner  prison, 
and  made  their  feet  fast  in  the  stocks.'  Suddenly, 
1  at  midnight  there  was  an  earthquake,  which  shook  the 
foundation  of  the  prison,  threw  open  the  doors  and  loosed 
the  bands  of  the  prisoners.  The  jailer  awoke  in  the 
greatest  consternation  and  alarm.  He  was  overwhelmed 
with  the  thought  that  the  occurrence  would  be  his  min. 
So  strong  were  his  feelings  of  obligation  to  keep  safely 
those  who  had  been  committed  to  his  charge,  that  when 
he  saw  the  prison  doors  all  open,  and  he  supposed  the 
prisoners  were  fled,  '  he  drew  out  his  sword  and  would 
have  killed  himself."  It  is  not  possible,  theiefoie,  to  sup- 
pose, as  some  Baptists  have  imagined,  that  the  jailer  went 
out  in  the  night,  with  the  prisoners,  to  he  baptized.  It 
would  have  been  a  breach  of  his  fidelity,  an  unjustifiable 
hazarding  of  the  escape  of  the  prisoners,  which  might 
have  forfeited  his  life  to  the  laws.  And  you  see  how 
sensitive  he  was  on  this  point. 

"Nor  was  this  necessary.  The  jailer,  it  appears,  by 
some  means,  had  water  at  hand  for  the  Washing  of  their 
stripes.  A  little  of  the  same  water  would  serve  for  the 
purpose  of  his  baptism.  And  more  than  all  this,  Paul 
himself  virtually  affirms  that  they  did  not  go  out  during 
the  night.  As  soon  as  the  morning  came,  the  magistrates 
sent  to  the  jailer  to  '  let  those  men  go.'  But  Paul  said, 
'  They  have  beaten  us  openly  uncondemncd,  being  Ro- 
mans, and  have  cast  us  into  prison  ;  and  now  do  they 
thrust  us  out  privately  ?  Nay,  verily  ;  but  let  them  come 
themselves  and  fetch  us  out.'  Surely,  this  refusal,  so 
indicative  of  conscious  integrity  and  uprightness,  would 
have  been  made  with  a  poor  grace  indeed,  and  without  tie 
least   propriety,  if  the    Apostles    had    already  been  out 


168  MoDj:  o*    hA&ttatl.  §  31 

daring  the  night  'privately'  in  search  of  a  river  or  pond, 
in  which  to  immerse  the  keeper  of  the  prison  and  his 
family.  We  must,  therefore,  take  the  account  just  as  it 
stands  in  the  Bible,  and  believe  that  the  jailer  '  took  them 
the  same  hour  of  the  night,  and  washed  their  stripes,' 
there  in  the  jail,  where  they  were,  '  and  was  baptized,  he 
and  all  his  straightway.' 

"  But  it  is  said  that  he  '  brought  them  out  ; '  that  is,  as 
I  understand  it,  he  brought  them  out  of  '  the  inner  prison,' 
into  which  he  had  thrust  them  for  special  safely,  So, 
when  he  is  said  to  have  '  brought  them  out  into  his  house/ 
it  was  only  into  another  apartment  of  the  same  building, 
where  he  could  more  conveniently  '  set  meat  before  them.1 
This,  however,  was  after  he  had  '  washed  their  stripes, 
and  was  baptized,  and  all  his.'  All  this  was  done  in  the 
prison  proper,  before  he  'brought  them  into  his  house. ' 
They  then  returned  to  the  prison  and  remained  there, 
under  the  charge  of  the  keeper,  until  the  next  day,  when, 
after  Paul's  refusal  to  go  out,  the  magistrates  *  came  and 
besought  them  and  brought  them  out. 

"  The  jailer  '  and  all  his,'  therefore,  were  baptized  in  the 
prison.  And  there  is  not  the  slightest  proof  that  they 
were  plunged  into  water  there,  but  strong  presumptive 
evidence  that  this  would  have  been  impracticable.  There 
is  no  intimation  of  the  presence  of  a  bath  suited  to  the 
performance  of  immersion  ;  and  a  jail,  in  those  days  of 
cruelty,  was  far  less  likely  to  be  furnished,  with  such 
accommodation,  than  the  dwellings  of  luxurious  wealth. 
Indeed,  there  is  no  probability  that  these  jDersons  could 
have  been  immersed  in  the  prison,  at  the  dead  hour  of  the 
night  ;  but  every  circumstance  to  indicate  that  water  was 
brought  in  and  applied  to  them  by  sprinkling  " 

5.   Two  other  Instances  of  Baptism. 
'■'  There  are  only  two  other   instances  of  baptism  pey- 


§  32  HISTORICAL    FACT*.  169 

formed  by  the  Apostles,  as  mentioned  in  the  history  of 
their  acts.  The  first  is  that  of  the  baptism  of  a  number 
of  Corinthians  by  Paul,  Acts  xviii,  7,  8.  The  second  is 
that  of  Paul's  baptizing  certain  disciples  at  Ephesus,  who 
had  been  before  baptized  unto  John's  baptism,  Acts  xix, 
1—5.  But  there  are  no  circumstances,  in  these  cases,  which 
indicate  the  mode  of  administration.*  We  are  left,  there- 
fore, to  infer  that  these  baptisms  were  performed  in  the 
way  so  strongly  indicated  in  all  the  other  cases,  as  the 
only  mode  in  which  baptism  was  administered  by  the 
Apostles."  Peters,  pp.  $9,  106. 

§  32.     Testimony  of  History. — Sprinkling. 

The  history  of  the  ordinance  sustains  the  same  view  of 
the  subject.  Tertullian,  who  lived  in  the  fore  part  of  the 
third  century,  is  universally  acknowledged  to  be  the  first 
writer  of  note,  who  speaks  of  immersion.  And  he  in- 
forms us  that  the  practice  then  was  trine  immersion, 
with  all  its  forbidding  appendages,  such  as  the  sign  of 
the  cross,  oil,  spittle,  etc.  (See  sec.  4)  ;  showing  con- 
clusively that  a  mass  of  errors  had  crept  into  the  church 
at  that  early  age.  Immersion  seems  to  have  been  gene- 
rally practiced  from  the  second  till  the  fifth  century. 
From  the  early  part  of  which  baptism  was  again  com- 
monly administered  in  different  parts  of  the  church  by 
sprinkling  and  pouring  ;  which  practice  continued  to  gain 

*  "  "Where  were  all  these  Disciples,  when  they  were  thus  met,  and 
instructed,  and  baptized  by  Paul  ?  Were  they  certainly  near  to  some 
pond  or  creek  ?  If  so,  how  singular  it  is,  that  converts,  in  those  and  other 
cases,  could  not  be  found,  unless,  by  a  remarkable  coincidence,  a  large 
body  of  water  was  near !  If  all  the  ponds  and  creeks  which  exist  in  the 
imagination  of  Immersionists  who  interpret  the  Acts  of  the  Apostle,  had 
really  watered  Judea,  then,  it  may  be  proved  by  calculation  that  there 
was  water  enough  to  have  turned  the  whole  land  into  a  sea."  Kurtz  on 
Baptism,  p.  238. 

15 


17$  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  S& 

ground  till  the  great  Reformation  restored  the  Bible  and 
the  light  of  truth  to  the  common  people;  after  being 
confined  to  the  cells  and  cloisters  of  monks  for  a  series 
of  long  years.  And  it  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  since 
the  Reformation,  the  doctrine  of  immersion  has  been 
losing  ground,  among  the  reading  and  thinking  part  of 
community,  in  the  same  proportion  that  the  Bible  is 
read  and  understood  ;  and  it  doubtless  will  continue  to 
lose  ground  till  the  truth  of  God  shall  finally  triumph 
through  the  whole  earth.*  Immersionists  now  form  a  very 
small  moiety  of  the  Christian  Church,  supposed  to  be 
only  about  one  to- fifty.  It  is  also  worthy  of  remark,  that, 
with  a  few  exceptions,  all  the  most  eminent  expounders- 
of  the  Word  of  God,  are  to  be  found  in  the  ranks  of 
those  who  practice  baptism  by  sprinkling  and  pouring. 

"  Moreoyer,  it  is  a  fact  worthy  of  particular  notice,  that 
during  the  dark  period  in  which  immersion  was  so  rife, 
ling  and  pouring,  was  neyer  called  in  question,  such  often 
the  validity  of  the  ordinance,  as  administered  by  sprink- 
occurred  on  extraordinary  occasions,  such  as  the  baptism 
of  the  sick  called  clinic  baptism.  These  baptisms  were 
pronounced  valid  by  Cyprian,  and  sixty-six  bishops 
assembled  at  the  Council  of  Carthage,  near  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  ;  and  that  noted  passage  in  Ezekiel 
(xxxvi,  25,)  was  produced  in  support  of  it ;  'then  will 
I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean/ 
etc.  Which  clearly  shows  that  sprinkling  was  baptism, 
in  the  estimation  of  Cyprian  the  learned  bishop  of  Car- 
thage.    This  same  view  of  such  baptisms  was  recognized 

*  A  statistical  report  of  the  Baptists  in  Xcw  York  for  1853,  says, 
"  Mark  this  fact :  During  the  last  nine  years,  our  numbers  have  decreased 
4  ten  thousand  and  sixty-four.'  But  the  population  of  the  State  has 
rapidly  increased,  and  that  of  New  York  city  has  nearly  doubled  itself." 
The  decrease  is  more  than  1,000  per  annum.  A  similar  report  from  Cin- 
cinnati, say3  :  "  The  Baptists  in  Cincinnati  have  in  ten  years  increased 
thsir  number  only  "  onohu*dved  and  thirty-eight.." 


§  32  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  171 

and  sustained  by  the  Council  of  Neocesarea,  which  was 
held  some  eighty  years  after  the  Council  of  Carthage. 

"Eusebius  mentions  a  disciple  who  had  related.,  but 
was  reclaimed  by  the  Apostle  John  and  re  baptized  with 
his  tears.  And  there  is  mention  of  a  Jew  who  was  taken 
ill  in  the  desert,  and  for  want  of  water,  was  baptized  by 
sprinkling  him  with  sand ;  but  afterwards  recovered,  and 
the  baptism  was  pronounced  valid  by  the  bishop,  with  the 
addition  only  of  pouring  a  little  water  upon  him.  In  these 
instances,  we  see  that  sprinkling  a  man  with  tears  and 
another  with  sand,  were  each  viewed  an  a  baptism.  And 
Origen,  a  native  Greek,  who  lived  in  the  fore  part  of  the 
third  century,  speaking  of  the  altar  on  which  Elijah 
directed  the  Priests  to  pour  several  barrels  of  water,  says 
it  was  baptized.  He  it  was,  as  we  have  seen,  who  substi- 
tuted rantizo  (to  sprinkle,)  for  bapto  (to  dip,)  Rev.  xix, 
13,  in  preparing  a  copy  of  the  scriptures.  Consequently, 
both  pouring  and  sprinkling  were  considered  baptism,  by 
Origen,  the  greatest  theologian  of  the  age,  as  well  as  the 
most  learned  of  all  the  fathers.  These  concessions  of  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Christians,  who  generally  practiced  trine 
immersion,  are  too  notorious  to  fear  contradiction  from 
the  more  intelligent ;  and  they,  with  the  greatest  unanimity, 
pronounce  baptism  by  sprinkling  and  pouring  to  be  scrip- 
tural and  valid.  They  said,  '  Let  not  those  who  have 
received  baptism  by  pouring  be  so  far  mistaken  as  to  be 
baptized  again."     Peters. 

History  too  fully  sustains  us  in  saying  the  Waldenses, 
have  always  baptized  by  sprinkling  and  pouring.  The 
Baptist  brethren,  it  has  been  remarked,  have  manifested 
a  fixed  determination  to  claim  those  noble  people  as  their 
ancestors,  and  holding  their  peculiar  views  of  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptism  ;  and  if  bold  assertion,  the  testimony  of 
the  slanderous  persecutors  of  the  Waldenses,  and  some 
extraordinary  liberties  taken  with  history,  could  prevail. 


172  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  32 

the  point  must  have  been  settled  in  their  favor.  It  is  a 
\v  -ii  known  fact,  that  they  now  are  Pedpbaptists  ;  and  it 
v  pra  :tice  immersion,  under  any 
vi.vuiiis.  .ui  es..  Uev.  J_>i .  Baird,  who  speni  .some  time 
among  them,  several  years  ago,  says:  "On  the  subject 
of  baptism,  these  churches  are,  as  has  already  been  inti- 
m  ited,  Pedobaptist.  And  their  pastors  assured  us,  that 
it  is  their  belief,  founded  on  their  histories  and  traditions, 
t'.i  it  they  hive  ever  been  sueh  from  the  earliest  times." 

"  And  there  is  another  important  fact  connected  with 
this  subject,  that  should  not  escape  attention,  which  is 
this  :  We  are  unable  to  trace  the  origin  of  the  Baptists, 
as  a  distinct  denomination,  holding  their  exclusive  senti- 
ments, any  further  back  than  the  history  of  the  Anabap- 
tists, a  set  of  fanatics  which  arose  in  Germany,  after  the 
Reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century.  The  Baptists  are 
very  fond  of  tracing  their  origin  back  through  the  Wal- 
denses,  and  old  Tertullian,  and  the  Apostles,  to  John 
the  Baptist.  But  it  seems  to  me  there  are  some  long 
strides  to  make,  and  some  dreadful  chasms  to  fill,  before 
they  can  possibly  reach  their  honored  namesake." 

And  there  is  still  another  remarkable  fact,  that  claims 
attention  before  we  close  this  sketch,  which  is  this  :  When 
immersion  came  to  be  generally  practiced,  in  the  third 
and  fourth  centuries,  the  Fathers  employed  baptizo  and 
baptisma,  to  represent  the  ordinance  of  baptism  alone, 
but  introduced  other  terms,  the  more  definitely  to  express 
the  act  of  immersion.  The  Greeks  introduced  kataduo 
and  katadusis,  to  express  an  immersion  into  the  water, 
and  anaduo  and  anadusis  to  express  an  emersion  out  of 
the  water.  They  speak  thus  of  three  immersions  and 
emersions,  (treis  katadusis  kai  anadusis)  of  baptism. 
Which,  by  rendering  baptisma  immersion,  would  read 
thus  :  Three  immersions  and  emersions  of  immersion, 
which  would  make    nonsense.      But  then  three  acts  of 


§  33  HISTORICAL    FACTS.  173 

immersion  were  necessary  to  make  one  baptism  or  purifi- 
cation ;  and  were  in  fact  but  one  baptism,  And  in  case 
tbey  employed  baptisma  instead  of  katadno,  (whicb  they 
seem  to  bave  done  sometimes,)  an  explanatory  note  was 
deemed  necessary,  informing  the  reader  that  in  that  par- 
ticular instance,  baptisma  means  kataduo,  lest  some 
misunderstanding  should  arise.  This  fact  proves  most 
conclusively,  that  the  Fathers  did  not  understand  baptizo 
as  our  Baptist  brethren  do,  as  meaning  clearly  and  defi- 
nitely to  immerse.  For  if  they  had  so  understood  it,  it 
would  not  have  been  necessary  to  introduce  other  terms 
more  expressive  of  the  act  of  immersion,  as  both  the 
Greeks  and  Latins  did  ;  nor  would  the  explanatory  note 
have  been  deemed  necessary  to  prevent  obscurity  and 
misunderstanding.  So  the  history  of  the  ordinance  is 
entirely  against  immersion,  and  altogether  favorable  to 
sprinkling  and  pouring  ;  the  validity  of  which  was  never 
called  in  question  till  quite  recently,  and  then  upon  very 
slender  authority,  as  the  intelligent  reader  must  see. 

§  33.  Recapitulation. 

Let  us  now  close  this  part  of  the  investigation  by  a 
brief  recapitulation  of  the  leading  facts  which  we  have 
been  able  to  elicit,  and  which  more  directly  prove  that 
baptism  administered  by  sprinkling  and  pouring  is  both 
scriptural  and  valid. 

In  the  language  of  Dr.  Peters  (pp.  107,  108)  :  *  "We 
have  now  considered  the  divine  warrant  for  baptism,  the 
meaning  of  the  term  baptizo.  and  the  Greek  particles 
translated  into  and  out  of,  in  connection  with  it.  We 
have  illustrated  the  meaning  of  this  word  by  the  Jewish 
ordinances  and  usages,  which  the  Apostles  call  baptism  ; 
have  showed  that  the  very  idea  of  cleansing  or  purifying 
by  water,  by  blood,  or  by  Spirit,  is  the  application  of  the 


174  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  §  33 

purifying  agent,  or  element  to  the  person,  and  not  the  - 
person  to  the  clement  ;  have  considered  John's  baptism 
icith  water,  and  those  prophecies  which  are  supposed  to 
intimate,  however  obscurely,  the  mode  of  Christian  bap- 
tism ;  and  we  have  taken  up  and  considered,  in  their 
order,  all  the  instances  of  baptism  described  in  the  New 
Testament,  as  performed  by  the  Apostles.  And  I  trust, 
it  is  now  plainly  seen  by  the  candid  leader,  that  there  is 
nothing  to  be  found  either  in  the  meaning  of  the  words 
used  to  designate  baptism,  or  in  the  circumstances  attend- 
ing its  administration,  to  favor  the  idea  of  immersion,  as 
the  mode  of  baptism  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  On  the 
other  hand,  both  the  words  and  the  circumstances  respect- 
ing this  subject,  do  greatly  favor  the  mode  of  sprinkling  ; 
so  much  so  indeed,  as  to  constitute  demonstrative  proof 
that  this  is  the  only  mode  of  baptism,  as  a  religious 
ordinance,  made  known  to  us  in  the  scriptures.  It  is  the 
only  mode  prescribed." 

But  to  be  more  pointed,  we  are  able  to  arrive  at  the 
following  conclusions,  to  wit  : 

1.  Christian  baptism  is  a  significant  ordinance,  in 
which  water  is  used  as  a  symbol  of  spiritual  cleansing  or 
sanctification.  Hence  it  is  frequently  called  a  washing, 
and  the  washing  of  water  ;  as  is  abundantly  evident  from 
the  foregoing  investigations. 

2.  Baptizo,  the  word  selected  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
denote  that  ordinance,  is  a  term  of  general  import,  and 
does  not  definitely  specify  the  mode  of  application,  neither 
does  the  commission  given  specify  the  mode  ;  so  that  the 
requirement  may  be  met,  according  to  the  letter,  by 
sprinkling,  pouring,  or  immersion.  But  there  are  other 
circumstances  which  do  clearly  indicate  the  mode  of 
application  to  be  sprinkling,  as  the  most  convenient,  the 
most   appropriate,  the    most   significant,  as  well  as  the 


J  33  -HISTORICAL    FACTS-.  175 

•most  scriptural  mode  of  baptism  ;  and  of  course,  the  most 
in  accordance  with  the  mind  of  the  Spirit. 

3.  The  mode  which  God  did  first  select  to  represent 
spiritual  cleansing,  was  sprinkling.  The  ablutions  of  the 
Levitical  law,  the  mode  of  which  was  prescribed,  were 
mostly  required  to  be  performed  by  sprinkling.  No  per- 
sonal immersions  were  required.  This  fact  has  been 
sufficiently  established,  (g  21.)  "If  then,  sprinkling  was 
©nee  the  most  appropriate  mode  of  representing  spiritual 
purification,  why  is  it  not  so  still?"  Moreover,  the 
sacred  writers  never  did  represent  spiritual  cleansing  by- 
plunging  a  person  under  water,  either  literally  or  figura- 
tively. Jfot  one  tittle  of  evidence  to  the  contrary  can  be 
produced.  *?  If,  then,  immersion  was  not  then  a  suitable 
mode  of  representing  sanctification,  how  can  it  be  so  now?" 

4.  "  The  inspired  writers  did  constantly  represent 
sanctification  by  sprinkling  and  pouring  "  ;  "  So  shall  he 
sprinkle  many  nations,"  "Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean 
water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean —  A  new  heart  also 
will  I  give  you,"  etc.  Here  the  prophets  represent  the 
same  thing  by  sprinkling  that  we  do  in  Christian  baptism 

—  a  new  heart.  And  the  Apostles  used  the  very  same 
mode  of  expression,  and  to  represent  the  very  same  thing 

—  the  purification  of  ihe  heart.  '  Having  our  hearts 
sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience,  and  our  bodies  washed 
with  pure  water.'  Then  what  mode  of  baptism  so  appro- 
priate —  so  significant  of  spiritual  cleansing, —  and  so 
much  in  accordance  with  the  great  system  of  truth,  which 
runs  through  every  dispensation  of  the  Church  —  through 
all  time  ?  " 

5.  The  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  —  of  which  the  water 
is  the  emblem  —  is  called  baptism,  and  the  washing  of 
regeneration.  "  For  by  one  Spirit  are  we  all  baptized  into 
one  body  —  and  have  been  made  all  to  drink  into  one 
Spirit."^    But  here  let  us  inquire  what  mode  God  has 


176  MODE    OF    BAPTISM.  g  33 

selected  by  which  to  represent  this  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  And  we  .shall  find  that  the  Spirit  is  uniformly 
represented  as  poured  out,  shed  forth,  falling  upon,  etc. 
"  I  will  j;o«r  out  in  those  days  of  my  Spirit;"  "He 
hath  shed  forth  this  which  ye  now  see  and  hear,"  and 
John  said,  "  I  indeed  baptize  yon  with  water,  but  he 
shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire." 
This  prediction  was  fulfilled  on  the  day  of  Pentecost ; 
there  was  indeed  a  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  there 
was  no  immersion  in  the  Spirit.  And  the  law  of  analogy 
requires  that  there  should  bo  a  Strict  resemblance  or  simi- 
larity between  the  symbol  and  the  thing  represented  ;  and 
I  ask  what  possible  analogy  does  exist  between  immersion 
under  water,  and  the  pouring  out,  shedding  forth,  falling 
upon,  etc.,  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ? 

6.  "  From  the  time  Christian  baptism  was  instituted, 
we  find  not  one  instance  on  record  of  the  Apostles  going 
after  water  for  the  purpose  of  baptizing.  Philip  and  the 
Eunuch  were  not  going  in  search  of  water,  but  came  to 
it  on  their  journey.  The  Apostle  Paul,  according  to  the 
obvious  meaning  of  the  language,  was  baptized  in  a  city, 
in  a  private  house,  standing  up,  as  we  have  seen.  Ana- 
nias came  and  found  him  blind  and  enfeebled,  and  said 
unto  him,  '  Arise/  (stand  up)  '  and  be  baptized  ; '  '  and 
he  arose  and  was  baptized.'  Tens  of  thousands  were 
baptized  by  the  Apostles,  in  a  country  having  few 
streams  of  water  of  any  considerable  depth,  yet  they  were 
always  able  to  be  baptized,  the  many  or  the  few,  without 
delay,  whenever,  and  wherever  they  professed  faith  —  in 
the  crowded  city,  in  the  country,  in  the  desert,  in  the 
prison,  night  or  day.  And  in  no  one  instance  is  it 
recorded,  that  they  went  one  step  out  of  their  way  after 
water  !  This  is  indeed  most  unaccountable,  if  immersion 
was  then  practiced  ;  but  if  the  Apostles  baptized  as  we 
do,  the  history  of  their  baptisms  is  just  such  as  we  shouR 


§  33  HISTORICAL   FACTS.  177 

have  expected.  Just  so  Pedobaptists,  who  practice 
pouring  and  sprinkling,  write  ;  and  thus  our  immersionist 
friends  do  not  write.  We  certainly  write  as  Luke  wrote, 
whether  we  practice  as  he  did  or  not." 

7.  Although  immersion  became  so  prevalent  for  a  time 
in  the  Church,  and  the  Fathers  generally  practiced  trine 
immersion,  yet  they  did  not  predicate  their  practice  upon 
the  import  of  the  word  baptizo,  as  specifying  that  particu- 
lar mode  of  baptism ;  but  upon  the  fact  that  it  is  an  open 
term,  admitting  of  the  greatest  latitude,  as  to  the  mode 
of  application.  This  is  quite  obvious  from  the  following 
facts  :  1st,  the  definition  of  the  term  as  given  by  the 
Fathers.  2nd,  their  application  of  baptizo,  with  the 
sense  of  wash,  cleanse,  purify,  thus  making  it  a  perfect 
synonym  of  katharizo,  to  purify.  And  3d,  their  recog- 
nition of  pouring  and  sprinkling  as  valid  baptism,  when 
performed  in  cases  of  emergency.  This  fact,  we  repeat, 
clearly  shows,  that  the  Fathers  never  viewed  the  meaning 
of  the  term  as  imperiously  demanding  the  practice  of 
immersion,  but  only  as  admitting  it  ;  and,  as  they 
thought,  more  appropriate,  because  it  was  considered  a 
more  thorough  and  complete  washing. 

The  argument  for  the  mode  of  baptism  is  now  brought 
to  a  close  I  intend,  however,  to  add  something  more 
upon  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  the  work  of  the 
Spirit,  in  regeneration,  sanctification,  and  the  bestowment 
of  miraculous  gifts,  which  cannot  directly  affect  the  mode 
of  baptism,  either  the  one  way  or  the  other. 


PART    II. 


SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

We  have  now  reached,  in  the  course  of  this  investiga- 
tion, that  point  which  introduces  to  our  consideration, 
the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  the  exposition  of 
several  scripture  passages  which  refer  to  the  subject  of 
spiritual  baptism.  This  is  necessary  to  render  the  work 
complete,  as  it  corresponds,  in  the  main,  with  what  is 
termed  in  the  most  of  the  works  of  the  day,  "  the  design 
of  baptism."  And  it  has  at  least  an  indirect  bearing 
upon  the  general  argument  in  ascertaining  the  scripture 
mode  of  baptism,  by  the  very  natural  process  of  judging 
of  the  cause  from  the  effects  produced  —  the  analogy  that 
exists  between  the  type  and  the  antitype.  In  the  language 
of  scripture  the  term  baptism  is  applied  to  almost  the 
whole  of  the  Spirit's  work,  both  in  his  ordinary  and  his 
extraordinary  influences  ;  not  only  in  enlightening  and 
sanctifying  believers,  but  also  in  enduing  them  with 
miraculous  gifts. 

Furthermore,  that  part  of  the  subject  which  remains  to 
be  discussed,  is  of  far  more  importance  in  almost  every 
point  of  view,  than  that  which  has  gone  before,  since  the 
one  is  merely  the  shadow  or  emblem,  while  the  other  is 
the  substance  —  the   reality.     But  it  must  necessarilv  be 


§  34  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  179 

accomplished  at  the  expense  of  some  repetitions,  as  nearly 
all  the  texts  upon  the  subject  of  baptism,  have  already- 
passed  under  review,  and  most  of  the  remarks  and  criti- 
cisms which  are  necessary  in  the  one  case,  will  also  apply 
in  the  other,  from  the  very  close  correspondence  which 
necessarily  exists  between  the  two.  And  since  spiritual 
baptism  is  of  paramount  importance,  and  since  there  has 
been  comparatively  little  written  or  published  upon  this 
part  of  the  subject,  it  hence  becomes  necessary  to  give  it 
a  general,  though  it  may  be  but  a  brief  examination.  In 
doing  which,  I  propose  to  notice  it  in  the  following  par- 
ticulars, to-wit  :  (1.)  The  reality;  (2.)  Perpetuity; 
(3.)  Author;  (4.)  Means  employed  ;  (5.)  The  nature; 
and  (6.)  The  effects  of  spiritual  baptism. 

§  34.    The  Reality  of  Spiritual  Baptism. 

John  the  Baptist  says,  (Matt,  iii,  11):  "  I  indeed 
baptize  you  with  water — he  shall  baptize  you  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  Here  "  John  draws  the  con- 
trast between  his  own  baptism  and  that  of  Christ,  which 
exists  in  three  particulars  —  the  subject,  the  agent,  and 
the  means.  In  the  case  of  John  the  subject  was  the  body, 
the  agent  was  a  man,  and  the  means  was  the  water.  In 
the  case  of  Christ,  the  subject  was  the  mind,  the  agent 
was  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  means  were  the  truth  and 
emotions  of  God."  This  prediction  of  John  was  fully 
verified  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  and  at  the  house  of  Cor- 
nelius, both  in  the  Spirit's  purifying  and  miraculous 
influences. 

"  When  the  Pentecost  was  fully  come,"  says  Dr.  Jen- 
kyn,  "the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  manifested  them- 
selves under  a  two -fold  aspect :  the  miraculous  and  the 
ordinary,  or  the  immediate  and  the  mediate.  On  the 
Apostles  the  influences   were  partly  ordinary  and  partly 


ISO  THE    REALITY    OF  §  34 

miraculous.  On  the  three  thousand  converts  the  influ- 
ences were  ordinary  alone.  This  is  evident  from  the 
different  results  of  the  respective  classes  of  influences. 
The  effects  of  the  immediate  influences  on  the  Apostles 
were,  that  they  spake  with  other  tongues,  and  wrought 
various  miracles.  The  effects  of  the  ordinary  influences 
on  the  converts  were,  that  '  they  continued  daily  in  the 
temple,  and  breaking  bread  from  house  to  house,  did  eat 
their  meat  with  gladness  and  singleness  of  heart,  praising 
God,  and  having  favor  with  all  the  people.  And  they  con- 
tinued steadfast  in  the  Apostle's  doctrine  and  fellowship.'  " 
And  Paul  says,  1  Cor.  xii,  13,  "  For  by  one  Spirit  are 
we  all  baptized  into  one  body  —  and  have  been  all  made  to 
drink  into  one  Spirit."  Here  the  Holy  Spirit  is  directly 
said  to  baptize,  and  in  this  case  all  external  acts  are 
of  course  excluded,  and  purify  is  the  only  appropriate 
sense.  If  any  shall  say,  that  admitting  to  the  church  by 
the  external  rite,  or  that  extraordinary  gifts,  is  here  meant, 
I  reply,  admission  into  the  visible  Church  is  never  per- 
formed by  the  Spirit,  but  by  man.  And  this  baptism  is 
as  much  an  internal  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the 
causing  to  drink  into  one  Spirit,  which  is  not  external, 
but  an  internal  and  real  work  of  the  Spirit.*  Nor  could 
extraordinary  gifts  be  here  meant,  for  the  text  says  "  we 
all, —  including  the  Apostles  and  all  other  believers  — 
have  been  made  to  share  in  this  baptism  into  one  body, 
and  to  drink  into  one  Spirit ;  which  will  not  apply  to 
extraordinary  gifts,  for  they  were  not  conferred  upon 
all  indiscriminately.  Besides,  both  this  text  and  the 
parallel  one,  (Gal.  iii,  27,  28,)  expressly  point  out  the 
legitimate  effects  of  this  internal  work  of  the  Spirit,  here 
called  baptism,  in  removing  all  the  ordinary  distinctions 
known  among  men.  Effects  which  cannot,  with  any 
degree  of  propriety,  be  affirmed,  either  of  the  external 
*  Sec  Beccher,  pp.  2'"-,  28. 


§  34  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  181 

rite,  or  of  extraordinary  gifts.  "  For,"  says  the  Apostle, 
"  as  many  of  you  as  have  t>een  baptized  into  Christ,  have 
put  on  Christ.  There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  there  is 
neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is  neither  male  nor  female  : 
for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus."  These  effects,  the 
removal  of  all  these  natural  distinctions  clearly  involve 
the  idea  of  an  internal  spiritual  work,  in  putting  off  the 
body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  —  the  old  man  with  his 
deeds  ;  and  that  of  putting  on  Christ,  or  "  the  new  man, 
which  is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  Him 
that  created  him."  Compare  Rom.  xiii,  14,  and  Col.  iii, 
9-11. 

Pres.  Beecher  says  upon  this  subject,  (p.  Ill,)  "  What 
then  are  the  facts  as  they  present  themselves  in  the  New 
Testament  ?     They  are  these  : 

1.  There  is  a  baptism  infinitely  more  important  than 
the  external  baptism,  and  of  which  the  external  baptism 
is  but  a  sign. 

2.  In  the  spiritual  baptism,  a  believer  is  actually  purged 
from  sin  and  guilt,  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  In  the  external, 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  is  openly  announced  to  him,  on 
the  assumption  that  he  has  repented  and  believes,  as  he 
professes. 

3.  The  person  baptized  (with  water)  is  regarded  as 
calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  for  forgiveness,  and  the 
baptizer  as  announcing  his  forgiveness  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord.     Acts  xxii,  16. 

4.  In  the  case  of  internal  baptism,  there  is  no  such 
external  use  of  the  name  of  God,  but  a  real  forgiveness 
resulting  in  actual  union  to  Christ.     Hence, 

5.  The  form  —  Baptizesthai  eis  onoma  Christon  —  to 
be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ,  is  adapted  to  express 
the  external  baptism  ;  Baptizesthai  eis  Christon  —  to  be 
baptized  into  Christ  —  to  express  the  internal  baptism, 
that  actually  unites  to  Christ. 


.182  THE    REALITY    OF  §  34 

6.  To  this  view,  all  facts  accord,  for  in  every  instance 
where  onoma  (name)is  used,  there  is  internal  evidence  in 
the  passage  to  prove  that  external  baptism  is  meant ; 
Matt,  xxviii,  19  ;  Acts  ii,  38  ;  Acts  viii,  16  ;  Acts  x,  48  ; 
Acts  xix,  5  ;  Acts  xxii,  16  ;    1  Cor.  i,  13,  15. 

But  in  every  case  where  onoma  (name)  is  omitted,  and 
eis  (into)  precedes  Christon,  (Christ,)  or  soma  (body,) 
denoting  the  spiritual  body  of  Christ,  (the  church  invis- 
sible, )  there  is  internal  evidence  that  external  baptism  is 
not  meant,  and  that  internal  is  meant.  Kom.  vi,  3,  4  ; 
1  Cor.  xii,  13  ;  Gal.  iii,  27." 

There  are  several  passages  in  the  Old  Testament  scrip- 
ture, which,  when  properly  understood,  are  evidently 
prophecies  of  spiritual  baptism  ;  particularly  Isa.  iv,  4  ; 
Mai.  iii,  1-3,  and  Eze.  xxxvi,  25. 

That  these  passages  are  predictions  of  the  baptism  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  days  of  the  Messiah,  the  testimony 
of  the  Fathers  is  very  abundant.  And  though  their  theo- 
logical views  are  not  to  be  depended  upon  in  every  instance, 
still,  in  this  particular,  they  are  of  some  value,  in  ascer- 
taining what  the  sense  of  the  church  was  upon  this  sub- 
ject, at  that  early  period,  even  down  to  the  age  when 
miracles  had  scarcely  ceased.  Says  Beecher,  (p.  217,) 
"  The  Fathers  saw  types  of  this  baptism  in  the  fire  that 
came  down  from  Heaven  and  consumed  the  sacrifice  of 
Elijah,  and  the  fire  kindled  by  Nehemiah,  according  to  the 
2d  Book  of  Maccabees,  by  sprinkling  water. 

"  Thus,  said  they,  in  the  baptism  of  fire,  a  divine  and 
heavenly  fire  descends  from  above,  and  enters  into  the 
heart,  and  purges  out  the  dross  of  sin,  and  makes  us 
pure. 

V  Nor  is  this  view  sustained  by  the  Fathers  alone.  It 
originates  from  the  very  nature  of  things.  The  Holy 
Spirit  is  neither  figuratively  nor  literally,  a  river,  lake,  or 
pool,  but  a  living,  intelligent  being,  from  whom  an  illu- 


§  34  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  183 

minating  and  purifying  influence  goes  forth,  as  light  and 
heat  from  the  sun. 

"Hence  we  are  not  spoken  of  as  immersed  in  Him, 
but  purified  by  Him  ;  hence,  too,  it  is  proper  to  speak  of 
His  influences  as  poured  out,  or  descending  as  the  rain, 
or  going  forth  as  the  light  or  fire." 

"A  few  illustrations  of  these  from  Cyril'of  Alexandria 
must  suffice.  He  refers,  Mai.  iii,  1-3,  to  the  baptism  of 
Christ,  and  thus  proceeds  :  *  This  divine  fire  from  Hea- 
ven, that  is,  gracious  influence  through  the  Holy  Spirit, 
when  He  enters  into  the  heart,  then,  then  indeed,  He 
cleanses  away  the  pollutions  of  our  former  transgressions 
and  makes  us  pure.'  This  divine  and  spiritual  fire,  the 
inspired  John  clearly  announced,  saying,  '  I  indeed  purify 
(baptize)  you  with  water,  but  He  shall  purify  you  with 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  fire.'  Here  the  fiery  influence  is  con- 
ceived as  coming  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  entering  and 
purifying  the  heart.  Moreover,  Cyril  here  agrees  with 
Origen,  Basil  and  others,  in  considering  the  language  of 
John  as  referring  to  and  taken  from  those  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament  which  predict  of  the  Messiah,  purification, 
and  that  alone.  And  Cyril  oft  repeats  the  same  ideas  in 
other  parts  of  his  works.  But  his  comment  on  Isa.  iv,  4, 
is  still  more  striking.  He  first  refers  the  passage,  as  Basil 
does,  to  the  baptism  of  Christ,  and  then  explains  the 
spirit  of  burning  thus  :  '  We  call  it  grace  which  comes 
into  us  at  the  holy  baptism,  not  without  the  agency  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  we  are  not  baptized  with  mere  water, 
*  *  *     but  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  by  divine  and 

spiritual  fire,  which  consumes  all  the  pollution  of  wicked- 
ness in  us,  and  melts  out  the  pollution  of  sin.  Such  a 
coming  of  our  Saviour  also,  another  of  the  holy  prophets 
foretold,  saying,  '  Behold  He  shall  come  as  a  refiner's  fire, 
and  as  fuller's  soap,  and  He  shall  sit  and  purify  as  gold 
and  silver.'     *  *  *     I  remark  that  through  the 


184  THE  PERPETUITY    OF  §  35 

whole  passage  he  refers  to  a  divine  influence  proceeding 
from  God,  which  he  calls  spiritual  fire,  which  enters  the 
heart,  and  consumes  and  melts  out  the  pollution  of  sin. 
He  also,  in  this  passage,  unites  both,  Isa.  iv,  4,  and  Mai. 
iii,  1-3,  as  predictions  of  baptism  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
by  fire,  to  be  introduced  by  Christ. 

"By  means  of  such  testimony,  the  controversy  as  to 
the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  settled  most  unanswer- 
ably and  forever."     Beecher,  pp.  217,  218. 

§  35.     The  Perpetuity  of  Spiritual  Baptism. 

That  the  personal  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  His 
diversified  operations,  of  the  ordinary  character,  includ- 
ing spiritual  baptism  of  course,  is  a  permanent  blessing 
inherited  by  the  church,  is  an  established  fact,  by  a  num- 
ber of  scripture  considerations. 

Says  Dr.  Jenkyn,*  "  The  supernatural  influences  which 
accompanied  the  Pentecostal  phenomenon  were,  speaking 
philosophically,  the  accidents  suited  and  necessary  for  that 
occasion  only,  rather  than  the  essential  elements  of  the 
pro?nise  and  design  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  grounds,  there- 
fore, on  which  the  Christian  Church  is  warranted  to  expect 
saving  influences  to  continue  in  permanent  operation, 
remain  undisturbed  and  impregnable.  On  these  grounds 
I  take  up  the  position,  that  the  converting  and  saving 
influences,  which  the  Holy  Spirit  manifested  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost,  are  always  to  continue  in  the  church,  and 
ought  always  to  be  as  much  expected  and  waited  for  as 
they  were  by  the  first  Disciples. 

"The   influences    of   the  Holy  Spirit  are  essentially 
necessary  to  the  continuance  of  the  church  in  the  world. 

*The  most  of  this  section  is  abridged  from  Dr.  Jenkyn's  Work  on  the 
Spirit. 


§  35  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  185 

Constant  and  continued  accessions  of  new  converts  are 
are  essential  to  its  very  existence,  as  well  as  its  continual 
holiness  and  consolation.  Which  are  all  essentially  and 
absolutely  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  Jesus  Christ  is  maintaining  a  constant  intercession 
with  the  Father,  that  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
might  be  permanent  in  the  church.  He  said,  '  I  will  pray 
the  Father  for  you,  and  He  shall  send  you  another  Com- 
forter, that  He  may  abide  with  you  forever.'  This  inter- 
cession is  not  yet  closed,  and  as  long  as  '  the  blood  that 
speaketh  '  ])leads  for  us,  the  church  has  warrants,  by  which 
it  is  impossible  for  God  to  lie,  to  expect  that  the  influences 
of  the  Comforter  will  abide  in  it,  fresh,  strong,  and  lively 
forever.  Our  Lord  gave  to  His  Church  a  pledge  which 
He  has  never  recalled  :  '  I  will  not  leave  you  comfortless,' 
or  '  orphans  :  '  but  never  were  orphans  more  destitute, 
and  forlorn,  than  would  the  church  be  without  the  Holy 
Spirit.  But  this  constitutes  the  prime  object  of  the 
Spirit's  personal  mission  into  the  world,  as  has  been 
remarked,  to  supply  the  personal  absence  of  the  Lord. 
It  is  true,  He  was  going  away  for  a  season  ;  but  He  would 
not  leave  them  comfortless  —  He  would  come  again  by 
His  Spirit,  and  finally  the  second  time  without  sin  unto 
salvation.  It  was  in  this  sense  that  He  said,  'Lo  !  I  am 
with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world  ; '  and 
again,  '  When  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them.'  He  is  eminently 
present  by  His  Spirit. 

<;  The  Christian  dispensation  is  pre-eminently  desig- 
nated '  the  ministration  of  the  Spirit ; '  not  only  to 
distinguish  it  from  the  dispensation  of  the  law,  but  because 
His  personality,  divinity,  and  agency,  are  so  transcendently 
manifested  in  gospel  times  as  to  outshine  all  former  mani- 
festations, and  indeed  to  render  them  as  if  they  had  not 
been  by  reason  <  of  the  glory  that  exieUeth.'     The  Holy 

10 


186  THE  rERFETUlTY  OF.  J   35 

Spirit  formed  the  character  of  the  author  and  subject  of 
tlu  gospel  ;  endows  with  various  gifts  and  talents,  the 
ministers  of  the  gospel  ;  appoints  to  ministers  their 
respective  spheres  of  labor;  and  gives  to  every  agent  and 
laborer  for  souls  a  determinate  measure  and  kind  of 
success.  All  the  ordinances  of  the  sanctuary,  and  all  the 
means  of  grace,  and  all  the  duties  and  privileges  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  have  a  direct  and  constant  reference  to 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  The  influences  of  the  day  of  Pentecost  continue  to  this 
day,  undiminished  and  unchangable,  in  the  perpetual 
inspiration  and  power  of  the  New  Testament.  Other 
means  of  inspiration  have  ceased  ;  the  Shekinah  is  for- 
ever quenched  ;  the  Urim  and  Thummim  have  withdrawn 
their  splendors  ;  the  Bath  Kol  has  hushed ;  angelic  visits 
are  discontinued  ;  dreams  and  visions  are  annulled ;  but 
the  scriptures,  '  the  Word  of  the  Lord  abideth  forever.' 
The  events  of  the  Pentecost  prove  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  the  revelation  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  abiding 
medium  of  His  inspiration.  The  author  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  always  describes  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel  by  a  word  parakagein,  derived  from  the  office  of 
the  Holy  Paroclete  ;  and  the  transmission  of  the  gospel 
to  succeeding  ages,  and  to  other  nations,  is  always  a 
conveyance  (ministration)  of  the  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

"  It  is  distinctly  promised,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  shall 
continue  to  be  through  all  time  present  in  the  church. 
'  As  for  me,  this  is  my  covenant  with  them  saith  the  Lord  ; 
my  Spirit  that  is  upon  thee,  and  my  words  which  I  have 
put  in  thy  mouth,  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth,  nor 
out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of 
thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the  Lord,  from  henceforth  and  for- 
ever.' In  this  '  exceeding  great  and  precious  promise,' 
God  marshals  around  Him  all  the  hosts  of  His  people, 


I  35  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  18? 

calls  their  fixed  attention  to  what  He  is  promising,  what 
He  engages  to  do,  and  what  may  be  expected  from  His 
pledged  character.  His  promise  is  univesral  in  its  aspect, 
and  uninterrupted  in  its  continuance.  In  harmony  with 
this  early  assurance,  one  of  the  last  of  the  prophets  is 
commissioned  to  say,  'My  Spirit  remaineth  among  you, 
fear  not.'  And  the  blessed  Saviour  said,  just  before  His 
departure,  *  I  will  pray  the  Father,  and  He  will  give  you 
another  Comforter,  that  He  may  abide  with  you  forever.' 
John  xvi,  16.  This  promise  is  not  limited  to  the  Apos- 
tles, but  is  extended  to  all  that  believe,  and  to  all  the 
churches  that  shall  ever  be  collected  by  the  ministry  of  the 
gospel.  Said  Christ,  'Lo  !  I  am  with  you  always,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world.' 

"The  administration  of  Christian  baptism  in  the  name 
of  a  trinity  of  persons  in  the  Godhead,  is  predicated  in 
the  fact,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  a  permanent  residence 
in  the  church  with  all  His  plenitude  of  blessings,  as  well 
as  the  Father  and  the  Son.  Also,  the  gospel  benediction 
assumes  that  the  communion  of  the  Spirit  shall  be  in  the 
church  as  permanent  as  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  and  the  love  of  God  our  Father.  God  has  fur- 
nished the  church  with  a  regular  system  of  means,  which 
he  has  designedly  contrived  and  adjusted  to  put  His 
people  in  direct  communication  with  the  supply  of  the 
Spirit.  The  conventional  name  given  to  these  ordinances 
is  most  felicitous  :  they  are  called  '  the  means  of  grace.' 
These  means  are  always  the  channel  and  the  conduits 
for  the  communications  and  conveyance  of  the  holy 
influences. 

"The  distinct  and  separate  class  of  duties,  which  the 
church  owes  to  the  Holy  Spirit  personally,  springs  from 
the  doctrine  that  His  influences  are  permanently  present. 
1  If  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  are  not  now  really  present 
in  the  church,  our  duties  toward  Him  are  become  as  nuga- 


188  THE  AUTHOR    OF  §  36 

tory,  as  those  of  tlie  present  race  of  Jews  towards  the 
angel  that  once  led  the  church  in  the  wilderness.  Take 
a  few  specimens  of  our  duties.  '  Be  ye  filled  with  the 
Spirit ; '  '  Walk  in  the  Spirit ; '  '  Grieve  not  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  God;'   '  Quench  not  the  Spirit.' 

"  The  obligations  of  these  duties  are  binding  only,  ay 
they  are  linked  to  the  immovable  truth,  that  the  hallowed. 
tire  of  Divine  influences  is  in  the  Church  permanently 
present.  These  duties  and  admonitions  did  not  relate  to 
the  early  Christians  alone  ;  they  are  also  '  things  which 
belong  to  our  peace.'  We  have  not  the  shadow  of  any 
intimation  that  their  obligations  have  been  either  revoked 
or  rescinded.  The  self-same  Spirit  who  imposed  those 
duties  at  first,  enforces  them  to-day  ;  and  he  urges  them 
only  on  the  ground,  that  *  he  abides  with  us-  forever.' 
Hence,  from  all  these  considerations  —  with  a  number  of 
others  which  might  be  adduced  —  the  fact  that  the  per- 
sonal presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  the  permanent 
inheritance  of  the  Church,  from  the  day  of  his  descent  at 
the  Pentecost  —  through  all  future  time  —  in  all  the 
plenitude  of  his  sanctifying  and  saving  influences,  — 
including  of  course  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit  —  is 
clearly  and  fully  established.  For  to  deprive  the  Church 
of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  is  to  divest  her  wholly  of  a 
Divine  influence  of  the  very  first  importance.  It  would 
be,  in  fact,  to  deprive  her  altogether  of  the  office-work  of 
the  Holy  Comforter. 

§  36.     The  Author  or  Agent  employed  in  Spiritual 
Baptism. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  there  are  a  number  of  Old 
Testament  prophecies  in  which  it  is  clearly  predicted,  that 
the  Messiah  should  purify  or  baptize.  And,  as  President 
Beecher  remarks,  (p.  25) :  "  This  view  alone  fully  explains 


§  36  SPIRITUAL    *APTlS5f,  189 

the  existing  expectation  —  prevalent  among  the' Jews, 
that  the  Messiah  would  baptize  (John  i,  25).  But  espe- 
cially is  this  foretold  in  that  last  and  prominent  prophecy 
of  Malachi  (iii,  1-3)  which  was  designed  to  fill  the  eye 
and  the  mind  of  the  nation  until  he  came. 

"He  is  here  presented  to  the  mind  in  all  his  majesty 
and  power,  but  amid  all  other  ideas,  that  of  purifying  is 
most  prominent.  He  was  above  all  things  to  purify  and 
purge,  and  that  with  power  so  great,  that  few  could 
endure  the  fiery  day.  '  Who  may  abide  the  day  of  his 
coming,  and  who  shall  stand  when  he  appeareth  ?'  " — 
(See  §14). 

And,  as  we  have  already  seen,  (§  34,)  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  equally  clear  and  explicit  upon  tho  subject.  In 
that  oft  repeated  text,  (Matt,  iii,  11,)  it  was  clearly  pre- 
dicted by  John,  that  the  Messiah  should  baptize.  Says 
he  :  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water  —  he  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  And  in  1  Cor. 
xii,  13,  the  Apostle  ascribes  this  baptism  directly  to  the 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  himself.  He  says  :  "  By  one 
Spirit  are  we  all  baptized  into  one  body." 

The  testimony  of  the  Fathers  upon  this  subject  is  also 
full  and  explicit.  I  will  here  introduce  some  brief  quota- 
tions, as  usual,  upon  the  authority  of  Pres.  Beecher,  pp. 
215,  216. 

The  facts  are  these.  The  Fathers,  in  commenting  on 
those  passages  in  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  it  is 
predicted  that  the  Messiah  should  purify,  do  regard  them 
as  predictions  that  He  should  baptize,  and  state  explicitly 
that  the  words  baptizo  and  katharizo  (to  purify)  mean 
the  same  thing.  Of  this  Basil's  comment  on  Isa.  iv,  4, 
(§  17)  is  an  unanswerable  proof.  In  the  Old  Testament,  it 
is  said,  concerning  the  Messiah,  ekplunei  and  ekkathariei — 
He  shall  wash,  and  He  shall  purge  or  purify. 

"la  the  New,  John  says,  Baptisei  —  He  shall  baptize, 


190  TfiE    AUTHOR    OF  §  36 

and  Basil  says,  they  mean  the  same  thing  ;  and  then 
defines  baptisma  —  baptism  —  as  meaning  katliarismos — 
purification. 

"Nor  is  this  all.  Eusebins,  of  Cesarea,  sustains  the 
same  view.  Commenting  on  this  passage,  he  says  that 
the  preposition  en  (here  rendered  by)  is  used  in  the 
causative  sense,  when  applied  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  only 
in  this  "passage,  but  in  the  New  Testament  too;  for  he 
says  that  the  expression  by  the  spirit  of  judgment,  and  by 
the  spirit  of  burning,  (Isa.  iv,  4,)  are  equivalent  to  the 
expression,  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  fire,  in  the  New 
Testament.     *  *  *     The  whole  comment  is  this  : 

**  Observe  whether  this  passage  is  not,  to  a  remarkable 
degree,  coincident  in  sense  with  the  evangelical  testimony 
concerning  our  Saviour.  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire  ;  "  for  the  expression  "by  the 
spirit  of  judgment  and  the  spirit  of  burning"  does  not  at 
all  differ  in  sense  from  the  expression  "by  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  fire."  In  the  one  case,  (Isa.  iv,  4,)  fiery  words 
reproving  them,  produced  a  purification  (katharsin)  of 
sins,  and  in  like  manner,  of  our  Saviour  in  the  gospel,  it  is 
said,  "He  shall  purify,  (baptisei)  not  with  water,  but 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  fire." 

In  regarding  Isa.  iv,  4,  as  a  prophecy  of  baptism, 
Origen,  Eusebius,  Basil,  Jerome,  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
and  Theodoret,  all  coincide,  and  just  as  clearly  do 
Theodoret  and  Cyril  regard  Mai.  iii,  3,  to  which  I 
referred,  as  a  prophecy  of  baptism  ;  and  the  same  is  true 
of  other  passages  in  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  it  is 
foretold  that  the  Messiah  should  purify." 

Inasmuch,  then,  as  it  was  foretold  that  the  Messiah 
should  purify,  and  inasmuch  as  purify  and  baptize  are, 
by  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  synonymous,  it  was  of 
course  foretold  that  the  Messiah  should  baptize.  And  a 
prediction  that  He  should  baptize,  would  of  course  awaken 


§  36  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  191 

an  expectation  that  He  would  baptize.  Hence  the 
expectation  is  accounted  for,  as  stated  before. 

Furthermore.  "Not  only  is  the  causative  sense  of  en 
thus  established  by  the  comment  of  Eusebius  of  Cesarea, 
and  other  Fathers,  on  Isa.  iv,  4;  but  it  is  no  less  clearly 
established  by  1  Cor.  xii,  13,  "By  one  Spirit  are  we  all 
baptized  into  one  body."  In  all  the  context  of  this 
passage,  the  Spirit  is  represented  as  an  active,  intelligent 
Divine  person,  by  whom  wisdom,  faith,  and  spiritual 
gifts  are  bestowed  ;  and  en  and  dia  are  interchanged  as 
equivalent.  To  one  is  given  by  (dia)  the  Spirit,  the  word 
of  wisdom ;  to  another,  the  gifts  of  healing,  by  (en)  the 
same  Spirit.  All  these  things  worketh  that  one  and  the 
self  same  Spirit  dividing  to  every  one  as  He  will.  After 
this  comes  the  assertion,  "By  one  Spirit  are  we  all 
baptized  into  one  body;"  that  is,  of  necessity,  purified 
and  then  united  in  one  spiritual  body,  not  immersed  into 
one  body.  The  Spirit  never  immerses  externally  — 
besides,  immersion  into  a  body  is  absurd."  Beecher, 
p.  313. 

From  the  foregoing,  the  scriptures  clearly  refer  the 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  Christ  as  the  Author  of 
that  work,  and  also  as  clearly  refer  this  work  to  the  direct 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  an  intelligent,  voluntary 
Divine  Agent.  Hence,  while  one  prominent  text  says,  in 
reference  to  Christ,  "He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  with  fire,"  another,  with  equal  clearness, 
affirms  that  it  is  "By  one  Spirit  we  all  are  baptized  into 
one  body;"  making  the  Holy  Ghost  the  immediate 
agent  in  this  internal  baptism.  And  there  is  no  real 
contradiction  in  the  word  of  God. 

In  the  great  scheme  of  salvation,  all  the  persons  of  the 
blessed  Trinity — constituting  the  one  God  —  are  essen- 
tially engaged  ;  but  it  has  pleased  the  Father  that  Christ 
should  have  the  pre-eminence  in  all  things  pertaining  to 


192  '•!!£  AL'IHOR  OF  J   36* 

the  Clmrcli.  Hence  he  says,  "  My  Father  worketh  hith- 
erto and  I  work."  And  again  :  "  As  the  Father  raiseth 
up  the  dead  and  quickenetli  them,  even  so  the  Son  quick- 
eneth  whom  he  will ;  "  and  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quick- 
cneth."  But  all  things  of  a  spiritual  nature,  are  under 
the  direction  of  Christ,  as  the  Head  of  the  Chnrch  —  the 
spiritual  body.  He  has  suffered  and  atoned  for  us,  and 
hence,  he  is  the  procurer  of  every  spiritual  good  ;  and  it 
is  to  him  we  address  our  prayers  at  the  door  of  mercy. 
Hence  there  is  a  propriety  that  he  should  be  the  dispenser 
of  all  these  blessings.  And  although  the  Spirit  is  the 
prime  agent  in  the  work  of  conversion,  still  Christ  con- 
curs in  it  in  every  instance ;  and  we  are  baptized  in  his 
name,  and  it  is  in  his  name  that  our  forgiveness  is  an- 
nounced. Hence  the  propriety  too  of  his  being  repre- 
sented in  the  Gospel  as  the  Author  of  spiritual  baptism  ; 
especially,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  dispensation. 
For  a  very  prominent  object  of  this  baptism,  in  its  extra- 
ordinary influences,  was  the  stupendous  miracles  wrought 
in  attestation  of  Christ's  mission  and  authority  to  change 
the  dispensation.  And  its  objects  accomplished,  this 
extraordinary  baptism  ceased  with  the  age  of  miracles. 

But  inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Ghost  is  a  voluntary  agent, 
and  since  the  gospel  is  the  ministration  of  the  Spirit ;  and 
inasmuch  as  the  prominent  object  of  his  presence  in  the 
Church  is  to  supply  the  personal  absence  of  Christ,  and 
especially,  since  he  is  the  principal  agent  in  conversion  — 
which  is  in  fact  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  —  there 
is,  therefore,  the  greatest  propriety  in  his  exercising  this 
prerogative  through  all  future  time.  Consequently,  for 
this  purpose,  the  Spirit  is  promised  and  sent  by  the 
Father  ;  and  he  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  — 
and  he  is  emphatically  styled  "The  Promise  of  the  Father." 

I,  therefore,  arrive  at  this  conclusion  upon  the  subject  : 
That  both  Christ  and  the  Spirit  exercise  an  agency  in  the 


I  37  THE    MEANS    EMPLOYED.  193 

administration  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
that  there  is  a  propriety  in  assigning  this  work  of  the 
Spirit,  in  his  extraordinary  gifts  and  miraculous  powers, 
to  Christ  as  the  immediate  agent.  And  since  this  baptism 
is  continued  in  the  Church,  in  its  ordinary  effects,  in 
purifying  the  heart  of  the  believer,  by  the  washing  of 
regeneration,  and  uniting  the  soul  to  Christ,  by  trans- 
lating it  from  the  power  of  darkness  to  the  kingdom  of 
God's  dear  Son  ;  there  appears  to  be  the  greatest  pro- 
priety in  assigning  this  work  more  immediately  to  the 
province  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  it  is  in  accordance 
with  this  view,  we  shall  endeavor  to  prosecute  the  subject 
in  this   investigation. 

§  37.  The  Means  Employed  in  Spiritual  Baptism. 

In  noticing  the  means  employed  in  the  baptism  of  the 
Spirit,  Ave  shall  not  attempt  an  enumeration  of  all  the 
means  and  instrumentalities  which  are  employed  in  the 
work  of  conversion,  but  only  such  as  strictly  belong  to 
spiritual  baptism.  And  these  are  three  —  the  truth  of 
God,  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  direct  agency  of  the 
Holy  Spirit, 

1.   The   Truth  or  Word  of   God. 

That  the  Word  of  God  exerts  a  salutary  influence  in 
spiritual  baptism,  is  abundantly  evident  from  a  number 
of  scripture  passages.  Believers  are  said  to  be  begotten 
with  the  word  of  truth,  to  be  born  by  the  word,  to  be 
made  free  by  the  truth,  and  to  be  cleansed  and  sanctified 
through  the  truth.  And  Paul  commended  the  Ephesian 
elders  to  God,  and  the  word  of  his  grace,  and  added,  "It 
is  able  to  build  you  up,  and  to  give  you  an  inheritance 
among  all  them  who  are  sanctified."  Consequently,  the 
truth  or  word  of  God  holds  a  prominent  place  among  the 

17 


194  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  §  37 

means  employed  in  dispensing  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

Again  :  the  Apostle  speaking  of  Christ's  purifying  the 
Church,  (Eph.  v,  26,)  says:  "That  he  might  sanctify 
and  cleanse  it  with  the  washing  of  water  oy  the  word" 
This  passage  brings  to  view  a  purification  symbolized  by 
the  washing  of  water,  but  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  effected 
by  the  word,  as  the  instrument.  And  God  has  in  other 
instances  used  water  as  the  symbol  of  truth.  "  Then  will 
I  sprinkle  clean  ivater  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean  i 
from  all  your  filthiness,  and  from  all  your  idols  will  I 
cleanse  you."  It  is  evident  that  this  celebrated  prophecy 
of  Ezekiel  alludes  primarily  to  a  great  purification  to  be 
effected  by  the  truth,  under  the  similitude  of  water,  and 
not  to  a  literal  sprinkling  of  water  in  the  ordinance  of 
baptism.  Still  the  mode  of  application  —  that  of  sprink- 
ling —  is  in  strict  accordance  with  the  Levitical  purifica- 
tions. There  is  some  incongruity  of  ideas  in  sprinkling 
the  body  with  water,  to  cleanse  from  idolatry,  while  there 
is  none  in  sprinkling  the  mind  by  the  word  or  with  the 
truth,  to  dissipate  ignorance  or  dispel  idolatry.  A  sprink- 
ling of  knowledge  or  of  science  is  a  common  phrase. 
Hence  the  propriety  of  the  expressions,  the  "  washing  of 
regeneration,"  and  "renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  To 
denote  the  beginning  and  progress  of  the  divine  life  by 
the  Spirit,  under  the  symbol  of  washing.  May  not  this 
view  afford  a  clue  to  that  more  difficult  text  in  Isaiah  : 
"  So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."  So  shall  he 
astonish  — or  sprinkle  — the  many  nations  —  during  the 
millennium,  by  the  dissemination  of  gospel  truth. 

In  all  the  instances  of  conversion  recorded  in  the  New 
Testament,  the  truth  holds  a  prominent  place.  The 
Ethiopian  Treasurer  read  the  word  of  God,  and  it  was 
explained  to  him  by  Philip.  Lydia  heard  the  word,  and 
attended    unto  the  things  which  were    spoken  by  Paul. 


§   37  THE    MEANS    EMPLOYED.  195 

And  so  of  all  the  other  recorded  instances.  And  the 
same  fact  is  corroborated  by  the  whole  history  of  revivals 
of  religion  in  every  age  and  country,  and  also,  by  our 
own  experience  in  the  present  day.  We  witness  no  con- 
versions away  from  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  We 
hear  of  no  revivals  springing  up  in  destitute  settlements, 
where  the  gospel  is  not  preached.  "  How  shall  they 
believe  in  him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard."  See  more 
in  §  26,  4. 

2.   The  Blood  of  Christ. 

The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  is  also  a  means  of  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  the  meritorious  or  effica- 
cious cause  of  the  sinner's  return  to  God,  for  it  lies  at  the 
very  foundation  of  his  justification  and  sanctification  in 
a  governmental  point  of  view.  We  are  represented  as 
purchased  or  redeemed  with  his  blood,  as  washed  from 
our  sins  in  his  own  blood,  and  as  sanctified  or  cleansed 
by  his  blood.  And  it  is  a  solemn  truth,  that  all  that  is 
valuable  to  the  sinner,  both  in  a  legal  and  a  moral  point 
of  view,  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  blood. 

The  blood  of  Christ  derives  its  value  from  the  fact  that 
he  has  become  our  sacrifice  for  sin, —  a  substitute  to  the 
law  and  justice  of  God  —  a  sin-offering  for  us;  and  by 
his  stripes — or  sufferings  —  we  are  healed.  The  atone- 
ment, as  has  been  remarked,  was  prefigured  and  illustrated 
by  the  Levitical  purifications  ;  and  its  abiding  efficacy 
was  typically  set  forth  by  "  the  waters  of  separation," 
(Num.  xix. )  which  constituted  a  perpetual  fountain  of 
cleansing,  for  the  ceremonially  unclean.  And  as  w^e  have 
seen  before,  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  is  two-fold  — 
deliverance  from  sin,  and  purification  from  spiritual  defile- 
ment, correspondent  with  the  double  object  of  atonement 
(See  §§  13  and  22.) 

The  blood  of  Christ   is  rendered  available  by  its  being: 


196  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  §    37 

applied  —  or  sprinkled  —  to  the  polluted  conscience.  In 
the  case  of  the  paschal  lamb,  it  was  not  only  necessary 
that  the  lamb  should  be  slain,  and  its  blood  shed,  but  to 
render  that  blood  available,  it  was  indispensable  that  it 
should  also  besprinkled  J  and  it  was  this  sprinkled  blood 
that  preserved  the  first-born  of  Israel  when  the  destroying 
angel  passed  through  the  land.  Christ  bas  become  our 
Passover — "the  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the 
sin  of  the  world."  But  his  blood  must  not  only  be  shed, 
but  also  applied  or  sprinkled,  in  every  instance,  to  render 
it  available  for  lost  sinners.  Hence  it  is  significantly 
called  "the  blood  of  sprinkling."  It  is  deposited  in 
heaven,  —  a  fountain  opened  —  like  that  which  the 
prophet  saw  —  for  the  washing  away  of  sin  and  unclean- 
ness.  It  is  also  called  "  the  precious  blood  of  Christ,"  and 
"the  blood  of  God,"  in  reference  to  its  intrinsic  value. 
But  as  we  have  already  seen,  this  inestimable  ingredient, 
in  a  legal,  as  well  as  a  moral  point  of  view,  must  be 
applied  to  us  individually,  by  the  agency  of  the  Spirit,  to 
become  available  ;  which  will  constitute  the  concluding 
division  of  this  section. 

3.   The  Agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

The  direct  agency  of  the  Spirit  is  of  course  indispen- 
sable as  a  means  in  the  administration  of  spiritual  bap- 
tism. The  subject  of  Divine  Agency  in  general  is  too 
extensive  to  receive  even  a  brief  notice  here,  nor  does  it 
strictly  fall  within  the  compass  of  this  work.  Still  it 
becomes  necessary  to  guard  the  unwary  reader  against 
some  mistakes  to  which  he  is  liable,  from  the  language 
employed  in  some  passages  of  scripture,  which  will 
necessarily  come  up  in  the  course  of  this  investigation. 

It  is  the  province  of  the  Spirit  to  quicken  or  impart  a 
new  life  ;  and  conversion  is  frequently  called  a  new  crea- 
tion, in  allusion  to  the  old  or  first  creation,  in  which  the 


§  37  THE    MEANS    EMPLOYED.  197 

agency  of  the  Spirit  is  very  prominent.  In  the  first 
creation,  "  the  Spirit  of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the 
waters;"  and  fey  his  Spirit  he  garnished  the  heavens. 
Bat  the  first  intimation  which  appears  in  the  scriptures  of 
a  spiritual  resurrection,  is  found  in  the  thirty-seventh 
chapter  of  Ezekiel  —  the  vision  of  the  valley  of  dry  hones 
—  the  idea  frequently  occurs  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
in  immediate  connection  too  with  the  subject  of  spiritual 
baptism.  The  Apostle  (Eph.  i,  18-20,  and  ii,  1-6) 
institutes  a  comparison  between  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
and  that  of  the  soul  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins  ;  and 
also  of  the  power  of  God  which  is  exerted  in  both 
instances  ;  making  it  no  less  an  act  of  omnipotent  power 
in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other.  He  wishes  the  Ephe- 
sians  to  "  know  the  exceeding  greatness  of  God's  power 
towards  us  who  believe,  which  he  wrought  in  Christ  when 
he  raised  him  from  the  dead."  And  (Rom.  vi,  4,)  he 
says  :  ''That  like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead 
by  the  glory  of  the  Father,"  (or  by  the  power  of  God,) 
"  even  so  we  also  thould  walk  in  newness  of  life."  And 
again,  (Col.  ii,  12,)  he  says:  "Ye  also  are  risen  with 
him  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,"  (or 
faith  in  the  power  of  God,)  "  who  hath  raised  him  from 
the  dead." 

From  this  strong  language  of  the  Apostle,  and  the 
phrases,  "  a  new  heart,"  "  a  right  spirit,"  "a  new  crea- 
ture," etc.,  some  have  been  brought  to  view  conversion 
as  entirely  a  physical  change,  and  of  course,  to  ascribe  it 
wholly  to  the  omnipotent  power  and  agency  of  God. 
While  others  to  avoid  this  extreme,  have  fallen  into  the 
opposite  one,  equally  dangerous,  and  have  affirmed  that 
conversion  is  entirely  a  moral  change,  and  consequently 
to  refer  it  altogether  to  man's  own  agency.  Now  the 
truth,  as  is  generally  the  case,  appears  to  lie  between  these 
two  extremes,  and  to  be  partly  physical  and  partly  moral 


198  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  g   37 

or  spiritual  ;  since  there  care  some  scriptures  which  refer 
it  to  the  agency  of  God,  and  others  to  the  agency  of 
man.  Therefore,  in  the  work  of  regeneration  or  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  direct  personal  agency  of  the 
Spirit  and  a  concurring  agency  of  the  creature  are  both 
contemplated.  In  the  first  creation  the  Lord  spake,  **.  and 
it  was  done."  He  said  :  "  Let  there  be  light,  and  there 
was  light."  So  it  is  in  the  phenomenon  of  conversion. 
It  is  "not  by  might,  nor  hy poiver,  but  by  the  Spirit  of 
God." 

It  is  strictly  the  province  of  the  Spirit  to  ^pply  the 
truth  to  the  sinner's  conscience,  and  to  render  it  effectual 
by  the  virtual  application  of  the  blood  of  Christ.  One 
part  of  his  mission  into  the  world  is  to  teach  us  all  things, 
and  to  bring  all  things  to  remembrance  that  Christ  had 
said  during  the  days  of  his  flesh.  Or  in  other  words,  to 
keej)  the  truth  of  God  ever  before  our  minds.  When 
Lydia  heard  Paul  preach,  the  Lord  opened  her  heart,  that 
she  attended  unto  the  things  which  were  spoken  ;  and 
they  were  made  effectual  in  her  conversion. 

So  it  is  in  every  instance.  The  sinner  hears  the  truth, 
and  is  then  brought  to  a  discovery  of  his  true  condition 
in  the  moral  government  of  God,  and  being  not  disobe- 
dient to  the  heavenly  vision,  he  appears  a  penitent  at  the 
door  of  mercy,  and  is  enabled  to  take  hold  of  Christ  by 
faith  in  his  blood  ;  the  Spirit,  who  has  led  him  thus  far, 
now  applies  that  blood  in  the  remission  of  sins  ;  or  in 
other  language,  sprinkles  the  sinner's  heart  from  an  evil 
conscience  by  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  he 
can  say  in  the  language  of  triumph,  "  God  who  com- 
manded the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  hath  sinned 
into  my  heart,  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ.  And  I,  with 
open  face,  beholding  as  in  a  glass,  the  glory  of  the  Lord, 
and  changed  into   the  same  image,  from  glory  to  glory, 


§38  THE    NATURE    OF    SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  19B 

even  as  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord."     But  the  "  excellency 
of 'the pov:tr  "  is  of  God,  and  not  of  me. 

§  38.  The  Nature  of  Spiritual  Baptism, 

In  giving  a  description  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  it 
k  necessary  to  observe,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  it 
is  of  two  kinds  ;  extraordinary,  and  ordinary  «r  direct. 
And  we  need  only  to  advert  to  the  circumstances  as  they 
occured  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  it  was  first  vouch- 
safed, for  an  illustration,  from  the  different  effects.  (See 
§34) 

Again,  the  baptism  of  the  .Spirit  may  be  divided  into 
external  and  sensible,  and  internal  and  spiritual,  with 
regard  to  effects.  As  witnessed  at  the  Pentecost,  by  the 
assembled  multitude  in  his  extraordinary  character,  the 
■effects  were  external  and  sensible,  they  were  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  the  gospel  —  were  cut  to  the  heart,  and  cried, 
Men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?  But  as  many  as 
believed  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  received  the  remission 
of  sins  and  internal  purification.  And  inasmuch  as  the 
external  or  extraordinary  class  of  influences  has  long 
since  ceased  —  the  objects  being  accomplished  —  and  the 
internal  alone,  is  the  permanent  blessing  of  the  Church ; 
at  will  of  course  be  unnecessary  to  take  any  further  notice 
of  that  kind  of  operations  which  was  peculiar  to  the 
primitive  ages  of  Christianity. 

We  now  come  directly  to  the  examination  of  spiritual 
baptism,  as  it  is  enjoyed  by  the  Church.  The  reader  has 
ao  doubt  ere  this  anticipated  our  description,  at  least  in 
part,  as  it  has  incidentally  appeared  in  the  course  of  this 
investigation.  We  have  in  general  terms  made  it  to 
correspond  with  conversion  or  regeneration.  It  is  i& 
fact,  regeneration  itself,  exclusive  of  the  different  states  of 
mind  which  precede  that  change.     It  includes  the  ideas  of 


200  THE    S4.TURE    OF  §  3& 

the  forgiveness  or  remission  of  sins,  the  purification  of  the 
heart  or  the  moral  powers  of  the  soul,  and  union  with 
Christ,  or  a  translation  from  the  kingdom  of  Satan  to 
that  of  Gtod's  dear  Son.  Or  in  other  words,  it  is  a  death 
to  sin,  and  a  regeneration  to  a  new  life  ;  and  also  a  pro- 
gressive sanctification  —  the  mortification  of  the  flesh  by 
a  continual  death,  and  a  continual  resurrection  to  a  life 
of  holiness.  But  since  the  adherents  of  the  opposite  view 
deny  these  positions,  and  others  aver  that  the  Church 
does  not  now  enjoy  the  blessings  of  spiritual  baptism  in 
any  shape,  it  hence  becomes  indispensable  that  we  should 
present  some  arguments  in  support  of  this  view. 

Pres.  Beecher  says  (pp.  310,  311):  "Clearly  the 
whole  discussion  on  this  point,  turns  on  the  question,  Is 
the  Holy  Spirit  spoken  of  as  a  person  who  purifies  or  as 
an  influence  in  which  Christians  are  immersed  ?  and  this 
depends  on  the  rendering  of  the  preposition  en.  If  we 
render  it  by,  then  a  person  may  be  denoted  ;  thus,  *  He 
shall  baptize  you  by  the  Holy  Ghost.'  This  demands 
purify  as  the  sense  of  baptism,  for  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a 
person  does  not  immerse,  he  purities.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  we  render  en  by  in,  then  divine  influence  is  implied,  and 
the  sense  immerse  is  admissible,  though  even  then  it  is 
not  necessary.  He  shall  immerse  you  in  Divine  influ- 
ences may  be  the  sense.  Dr.  Carson  insists  that  that  is 
the  sense,  and  that  by  it  is  denoted  the  abundance  of  the 
gift*  or  influences  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  entire  subjection 
of  the  soul  to  those  influences,  and  that  immersion  in 
water  is  a  symbol  of  these  things.  In  this  view  Dr. 
Carson  is  not  peculiar. 

"  Neander  in  his  history  of  the  planting  of  the  Church, 
says,  that  '  Submersion  is  a  symbol  of  the  immersion  of 
the  whole  man  in  the  spirit  of  a  new  life."  Wahl, 
Schleusner,  Bosenmuller,  and  Bloomfield,  are  also  of 
opinion  that  the  sense  is,  copiously  to  imbue  with  abun- 


§  38  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  201 

dant  gifts  of  the  Spirit.  But  beyond  all  doubt  this  view 
must  be  erroneous.  Indeed  it  is  very  remarkable  how 
full  and  how  powerful  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  is 
against  this  view.  In  Isa.  iv,  4,  it  was  predicted  (as  we 
have  already  seen)  that  the  Messiah  should  purify,  (ekka- 
tharizo,)  by  the  spirit  of  judgment,  and  by  the  spirit  of 
burning.  Here  there  can  be  no  dispute  as  it  regards  the 
causative  or  active  sense  of  en. 

"This  passage  the  Fathers  refer  to  with  great  frequency, 
as  conveying  the  same  sense  as  the  passage  in  question, 
1  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  with 
tire.'  Basil  says,  that  both  passages  plainly  foretell  the 
same  thing  concerning  Christ.  Eusebius  of  Cesarea  says, 
that  both  passages  '  coincide  in  sense  to  a  remarkable 
degree/  Origen,  Jerome,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and 
Theodoret,  coincide  in  this  view." 

After  giving  the  views  of  these  Fathers,  Pres.  Beecher 
continues  (pp.  313,  314,)  "In  addition  to  this,  the 
antithesis  requires  it.  John  did  not  mean  to  set  forth  the 
abundance  of  water  used  by  himself,  as  if  water  was 
scarce,  and  they  thirsty.  The  idea  is  ludicrous.  And 
yet,  if  the  second  member  of  the  antithesis  is  designed,  as 
Dr.  Carson  and  others  assert,  to  set  forth  the  abundance 
of  the  gifts  and  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  first 
member  should  set  forth  the  abundance  of  water  conferred 
by  John.  Thus  John  should  be  represented  as  saying, 
I  indeed  confer  upon  you,  in  your  necessities,  abundant 
supplies  of  water  ;  I  fill  and  imbue  you  copiously  with  it, 
but  He  shall  confer  upon  you  abundant  supplies  of  Divine 
influences,  and  shall  fill  and  imbue  you  largely  with  them. 
Besides,  if  the  passage  is  thus  rendered,  the  very  pith  and 
point  of  it  is  lost,  that  is,  the  contrast  between  an  external 
purification,  of  no  saving  power,  and  one  that  is  internal  and 
effectual,  produced  by  the  omnipotent  energy  of  the  Divine 
Spirit.    That  this  is  the  very  pith  and  point  of  the  passage, 


202  THE    NATURE    OF  §  38 

is  plain  from  the  fact  that  Basil  and  Ensebius  declare  that  to 
be  baptized  try  the  Hoty  Spirit  and  fire,  is  entirely  equiva- 
lent to  the  expression  in  Isa.  iv,  4,  'He  shall  purify  by  the 
spirit  of  judgment,  and  by  the  spirit  of  burning,'  also  from 
the  fact  that  the  Fathers  see  in  the  words  '  He  shall  purify 
and  purge,'  (Mai.  iii,  3,)  a  prediction  of  baptism  by  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Athanasius  also  expressly  declares  that  to 
baptize  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  is  to  purify,  and  he  does  not 
at  all  refer  to  to  the  idea  of  abundant  supplies  of  Divine 
influence." 

Hence,  from  this  amount  of  evidence  to  support  the  con- 
clusion before  stated,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  a  voluntary 
agent  who  purifies,  and  not  an  influence  in  which  believers 
are  immersed.      The  conclusion  is  clear  and  irrefragable.. 

1.  "The  purification  effected  by  the  Holy  Spirit  is  of 
two  kinds  ;  (1.)  a  deliverance  from  the  guilt  of  sin,  i.  e. 
liability  to  be  punished,  and  from  a  sense  of  guilt  through 
the  atonement;  (2.)  a  purification  from  spiritual  defilement. 

"It  is  through  the  atonement  that  pardon  is  given  ;  and 
through  the  Holy  Spirit  conviction  of  sin  is  produced  ; 
and  by  him  also  a  sense  of  guilt  is  taken  away  in  view  of 
the  atonement;  and  in  this  sense  he  is  said  to  cleanse 
from  sin  by  the  blood  of  Christ. 

"This  kind  of  purification  may  be  called  legal,  as  it 
relates  to  guilt,  forgiveness,  and  atonement.  The  other 
kind  of  purification  may  be  called  moral,  inasmuch  as  it 
removes  the  unholy  and  impure  feelings  and  habits  of  the 
mind,  and  produces  in  their  place  those  that  are  pure." 
This  is  the  sacrificial  sense  of  baptism.     See  more  §13. 

This  division  corresponds  also  with  the  twofold  object 
of  the  atonement;  (1.)  to  remove  legal  obstructions  or 
cancel  the  claims  of  the  law  against  the  sinner;  and  (2.) 
to  provide  a  fountain  of  cleansing  or  purification  for  the 
removal  of  moral  pollution.  Hence  the  relation,  as  before 
observed,  existing  between  water  baptism  and  the  atone- 


§  38  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  203 

nient  of  Christ.  He  lias  suffered  and  atoned  for  us,  and 
we  are  baptized  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  our 
forgiveness  is  announced  accordingly.  And  the  blood  of 
Christ,  applied  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  purges  the  polluted 
conscience  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God, 
This  is  the  washing  of  regeneration,  and  renewal  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

2.  This  baptism  or  purification  of  the  Spirit,  also 
includes  the  idea  of  a  mystical  union  with  Christ, 
indicated  by  a  number  of  scripture  passages  as  effected  by 
baptism  into  Christ,  or  into  the  body  of  Christ.  See  §34. 
It  is  a  change  of  state  or  condition,  in  a  moral  point  of 
view.  A  translation  from  one  state  to  another,  as  from  a 
state  of  sin  and  condemnation,  to  a  state  of  peace  and 
pardon  ;  or  from  darkness  to  light,  from  the  power  of 
Satan  unto  God.  It  involves  the  ideas  of  deliverance 
from  sin,  security  against  sin,  and  assurance  of  ultimate 
and  complete  happiness.  This  vital  change  is  well 
illustrated  by  the  baptism  of  the  Israelites  unto  (or  into) 
Moses  at  the  passage  of  the  Red  sea,  (1  Cor.  x,  2.)  This 
text  is  in  perfect  keeping  with  all  those  passages 
indicating  spiritual  baptism,  inasmuch  as  the  same  mode 
of  speech  is  employed  —  eis  ton  Mosen —  into  Moses. 

"Baptism  here,"  says  Beecher  (p.  112,)  "denotes 
neither  Christian  baptism  nor  external  baptism  ;  but  a 
throwing  back  of  the  name  of  the  antitype  upon  the  type, 
from  a  regard  to  similar  effects.  Believers,  by  spiritual 
baptism,  are  delivered  from  Satan  and  united  to  Christ. 
The  children  of  Israel  were  delivered  from  Pharaoh,  and 
really  united  to  Moses  as  a  leader  and  Saviour,  by  the 
cloud  and  the  sea.  There  was  here  no  external  profession, 
but  a  real  union  to  Moses  as  a  leader,  effected  by  a  separa- 
tion and  deliverance  from  Pharoh.  In  all  this  Moses  was 
a  type  of  Christ,  and,  therefore,  the  name  of  the  antitype 
is  thrown  back  upon  this  transaction,  and  it  is  called  a 


204  THE    EFFECTS    OF  J  39 

baptism  into  Moses,  but  not  into  the  name  of  Moses.  On 
the  same  principle,  i.  c.,  regard  to  effects,  spiritual 
baptism  is  called  the  antitype  of  the  salvation  of  Noah 
and  his  family  in  the  ark.  For  as  the  one  actually  saved 
Noah  in  the  ark,  so  the  other  actually  saves  believers  in 
Christ." 

That  the  change  here  brought  to  view,  is  a  real  internal, 
sensible  change,  wrought  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  is 
abundantly  evident,  from  the  varied  and  pointed  language 
of  the  sacred  penmen  upon  the  subject.  All  clearly 
expressive  of  putting  off  the  former  character,  and  putting 
on,  and  appearing  in  a  new  character,  suited  to  the  moral 
government  of  God,  and  the  moral  condition  of  man.  It 
is  called  the  "  putting  off  the  old  man  with  his  deeds" — 
"  the  old  man,  which  is  corrupt  according  to  the  deceitful 
lusts  ;"  and  ''putting  on  the  new  man,  which  after  God 
is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness" — "the 
new  man,  which  is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  the  image 
of  Him  that  created  him."  It  is  also  called  "the  putting 
on  of  Christ,"  with  all  the  blessed  consequences.  "There 
is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free, 
there  is  neither  male  nor  female ;  for  ye  are  all  one  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  have  been  all  made  to  drink  into  one 
Spirit,"  Compare  Eph.  iv,  22-24;  Col.  iii,  9-12;  Gal. 
iii,  27,  28  ;  and  1  Cor.  xii,   13. 

§  39.     And  the  Effects  of  Spiritual  Baptism. 

The  legitimate  effects  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  are 
threefold  —  they  involve  the  ideas  of  a  spiritual  or  moral 
death  and  burial,  a  quickening  and  resurrection  to  a  new 
life  ;  and  a  continued  death  to  sin,  or  mortification  of  the 
appetites,  answerable  to  the  scripture  doctrine  of  a  pro- 
gressive sanctification  or  growth  in  grace. 

1.  This  baptism  produces  produces  a  death  to  sin.    The 


§  39  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  205 

Apostle  says,  Rom.  vii,  9,  "  I  was  alive  without  the  law 
once,  but  when  the  commandment  came,  sin  revived,  and 
I  died ;  "  "For  I  through  the  law,  am  dead  to  the  law, 
that  I  might  live  unto  God,"  Gal.  ii,  19  ;  "  Wherefore, 
my  brethren,  ye  also  are  become  dead  to  the  law  by  the 
body  of  Christ."  Rom.  vii,  4.  All  mankind,  in  a  state 
of  nature,  are  represented  as  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins  ; 
but  here  is  a  different  death  brought  to  view  —  a  spiritual 
or  moral  death — a  death,  not  in  sin,  but  to  sin.  The 
sinner  is  alive  to  sin,  but  dead  to  God  and  holiness  ;  but 
the  believer  is  alive  to  God  and  dead  to  sin.  This  moral 
death  is  produced  or  effected  by  spiritual  baptism.  Says 
the  Apostle,  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  "Know  ye  not  that  so  many 
of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized 
into  His  death  ?  Therefore,  we  are  buried  with  Him  by 
baptism  into  death  ;  "  and  (Col.  ii,  12)  "  buried  with  Him 
in  baptism." 

This  moral  death,  includes  the  idea  of  a  crucifixion,  a 
death  to  sin,  and  a  burial  with  Christ.  These  changes 
which  occurred  with  Christ  naturally  and  externally,  are 
analogous  to  what  takes  place  with  the  believer  spiritually 
and  internally ;  and  thus  supply  the  lively  imagination  of 
Paul  with  these  metaphors,  which  are  by  an  easy  process 
of  the  mind,  transferred  to  the  believer.  The  believer  is 
regarded  as  identified  with  Christ,  and  as  having  a  fellow- 
ship with  Him  in  his  sufferings,  death  and  burial :  and  also 
in  His  resurrection  and  new  spiritual  life.  Says  Paul, 
Gal.  ii,  20,  "I  am  crucified  with  Christ;"  and  Rom. 
vi,  6,  "  Our  old  man  is  crucified  with  Him."  Crucifixion 
is  a  most  painful,  as  well  as  a  lingering  death  ;  and  every 
renewed  soul  can  testify,  from  sore  experience,  to  the 
death-struggle  in  his  own  bosom,  when  he  crucified  the 
"  old  man"  and  died  to  sin,  "  that  the.body  of  sin  might  be 
destroyed  ;  that  henceforth  he  should  not  serve  sin,  but 
live  unto  God."     Hence,  thefjeliever  is  enabled  to  com- 


206  THE  EFFECTS  OF  §   39 

prehend  that  contradiction  hi  terms,  in  which  he  is  repre- 
sented by  the  Apostle,  as  being  both  dead  and  alive  at  the 
same  time.  Col.  iii,  3,  "  For  ye  are  dead,  and  your  life 
is  hid  with  Christ  in  God;"  and  "I  ant  crucified  with 
Christ ;  nevertheless,  I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth 
in  me."  Gal.  ii,  20. 

2.  But  another  effect  of  spiritual  baptism,  is  a  resur- 
rection to  a  new  and  hidden  life.  The  idea  of  a  spiritual 
resurrection  is  not  confined  to  the  New  Testament,  as  we 
have  already  seen  ;  it  occurs  in  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the 
valley  of  dry  bones.  It  also  occurs  in  Eph.  i,  18-20  ;  ii, 
1-6,  and  Col.  ii,  13,  in  which  believers  are  represented  as 
being  quickened  together  with  Christ  — from  their  spirit- 
ually dead  condition  —  and  as  raised  up  together  with 
Him  ;  and  as  made  to  sit  together  in  heavenly  places  in 
Christ  Jesus.  And  this  is  all  ascribed  to  the  rgeney  of 
the  Spirit  —  the  power  of  God  —  the  glory  of  the  Father, 
etc.,  which  He  exercised  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ. 
(See  sec  37,  3.)  And  this  resurrection  is  also  produced 
by  the  baptism,  and  is  a  legitimate  consequence.  As  Ave 
have  already  seen,  the  baptism  is  spiritual  and  internal, 
and  so  are  the  crucifixion,  the  death,  and  burial,  and  the 
resurrection ;  and  of  course,  the  new  life  which  ensues. 
"Therefore,"  says  the  Apostle,  Eom.  vi,  4,  "we  are 
buried  with  Him  by  baptism  into  death  ;  that  like  as 
Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the 
Father  ;  even  so  we  should  walk  in  newness  of  life,"  or 
in  a  new  spiritual  life.  And  again,  Col.  ii,  12,  13, 
"Buried  with  Him  in  baptism,  wherein,  also,  ye  are  raised 
with  Him,  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God"^— 
"and  you  hath  He  quickened  together  tvith  Him"  It  is 
almost  needless  to  remark  here,  that  the  agency  employed 
in  this  resurrection  —  the  power  of  God  —  the  faitli  in 
that  power,  called  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  and 


§   39  SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  2(ft 

the  new  life  brought  to  view  — all  clearly  involve  the  idea 
of  a  radical,  thorough,  internal  change. 

This  view  fully  accords  with  a  number  of  other  scrip- 
ture passages  upon  the  subject,  and  possesses  all  the 
evidencing  power  of  truth.  The  Apostle  says,  Gal.  ii, 
20,  "  I  am  crucified  with  Christ ;  nevertheless  I  live,  yet 
not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me ;  and  the  life  which  I  now 
live  in  the  flesh,  I  live  by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God  ;" 
"Who  His  own  self  bear  our  sins  in  His  own  body  on 
the  tree,  that  we,  being  dead  to  sins,  should  live  unto 
righteousness,"  1  Pet.  ii,  24.  "Likewise  reckon  ye  also 
yourselves  to  be  dead  indeed  unto  sin,  but  alive  unto  God 
through  our  Lord  Jeus  Christ,"  Rom.  vi.  11.  "  For  ye 
are  dead,  and  your  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God,"  Gal. 
iii,  3.  In  all  these  texts,  the  believer  readily  recognizes 
that  new  and  hidden  life,  which  sweetly  works  by  love* 
and  he  is  constrained  to  ascribe  it  wholly  to  the  "  One 
Lord,"  who  suffered  and  died  for  him  —  the  "one 
faith,"  or  system  of  truth  believed  and  acted  upon,  and  the 
"  one  baptism,"  or  regeneration,  which  purifies  the  heart, 
and  unites  the  soul  to  God,  Eph.  iv,  5  ;  and  to  join  the 
Apostle  in  the  language  of  exultation,  Gal.  vi,  14,  "  God 
forbid  that  I  should  glory,  save  in  the  cross  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  the  world  is  crucified  unto  me,  and 
Junto  the  world."  "For  if  we  have  been  planted  toge- 
ther in  the  likeness  of  His  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the 
likeness  of  His  resurrection  ;  "  "rooted  and  built  up  in 
Him,  and  stablished  in  the  faith,"  Romans  vi,  5,  and 
Col.ii,  7. 

3.  And  finally,  another  result  of  spiritual  baptism  is, 
a  continued  death  unto  sin,  and  a  continued  resurrection 
unto  a  life  of  holiness.  The  class  of  texts  which  Ave  shall 
adduce  under  this  head,  represents  the  believer  as  radically 
changed,  as  dead  to  sin  and  alive  to  God  ;  and  as  exer- 
cising a  living  faith,  and  all  the  powers  of  his  renewed 


208  THE    EFFECTS    OF  §  3V 

soul,  in  making  greater  attainments  in  the  divine  life,  or 
in  reaching  greater  degrees  of  sanctification.  Moreover, 
what  is  affirmed  in  these  passages  concerning  this  spiritual 
change,  will  not  fully  apply  to  what  takes  place  at  the 
moment  of  conversion,  or  to  what  precedes  it,  hut  mea- 
surably to  the  exercises  of  the  renewed  soul  during  this 
present  life.  What  we  have  to  say  more  under  this  head, 
we  shall  notice  in  three  distinct  points  of  view  : 

1.   Salvation  from  the  Power  and  Love  of  Sin. 

The  Apostle  Peter  (1  Ptter  iii,  21)  speaking  of  a 
baptism  which  now  saves  us,  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ ;  which  Avas  prefigured  by  the  salvation  of  Noah 
and  his  family  in  the  ark,  by  water.  And  he  affirms  that 
it  is  "  not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,"  by  an 
outward  washing,  "  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience 
towards  God  ;  that  is,  a  conscience  purged  or  purified, 
by  the  sprinkling  of  the  "  blood  of  Jesus  Christ."  The 
salvation  here  brought  to  view,  derives  all  its  efficacy, 
from  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  as  applied  to 
the  conscience  in  spiritual  baptism  ;  which  rescues  the 
believing  soul  from  under  the  curse  of  the  law,  and  unites 
and  identifies  it  with  Christ  the  living  Head.  Now,  hear 
the  exhortation  of  Peter  addressed  to  such  in  the  language 
of  the  next  chapter,  which  meets  a  hearty  response  in  the 
bosom  of  every  new  born  soul.  "Forasmuch  then  as 
Christ  has  suffered  for  us  in  the  flesh,  arm  yourselves 
likewise  with  the  same  mind  ;  for  he  that  svffered  in  the 
flesh  hath  ceased  from  sin  ;  that  he  should  no  longer  live 
the  rest  of  his  time  in  the  flesh  to  the  lusts  of  men,  but 
to  the  will  of  God."  1  Peter  iv,  1,  2,  etc. 

2.  Aspirations  after  Higher  Attainments  in  the  Divine  Life. 

Says  the  Apostle  Paul,  Phil,  iii,   8-11,   "  I  count  all 


§  39  SPIRITUAL  BAPTISM.  209 

things  but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the  knowledge  of 
Christ  Jesus  my  Lord-*— that  I  may  win  Christ  and  be 
found  in  Him  —  that  I  may  know  Him,  and  the  poiver  of 
His  resurrection ,  and  the  fellowship)  of  His  sufferings, 
being  made  conformable  unto  his  death;  if  by  any  means 
I  might  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead."  Here, 
says  Beecher,  (p.  101,)  "  Paul  desires  to  know  fully  and  in 
a  spiritual  sense  —  that  which  corresjoonds  by  analogy  to 
those  natural  changes  in  Christ  —  1,  sufferings  ;  2,  death  ; 
3,  resurrection  ;  4,  experience  of  divine  power ;  and  he 
shows  how  he  aimed  at  the  spiritual  perfection  involved 
in  a  perfect  similitude  to  these  natural  events,  i.  e.,  a  per- 
fect moral  crucifixion,  death,  and  resurrection  • —  though 
he  had  not  yet  attained,  and  was  not  yet  perfect.  There 
is  not  the  least  allusion  to  his  own  natural  resurrection 
here.  That  would  take  place,  of  course,  and  without  any 
effort  on  his  part  ;  and  the  law  of  analogy  totally  forbids 
such  an  interpretation."  And  Paul,  doubtless,  realized 
the  consummation  of  his  highest  wishes,  when  he  could 
say,  near  to  the  close  of  life,  "I  am  now  ready  to  be 
offered,  and  the  time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand  —  I  have 
fought  the  good  fight,  I  have  kept  the  faith.  Henceforth, 
there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which 
the  Lord,  the  righteous  Judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day." 

3.  In  conclusion.  The  attractions  of  heaven  grow 
stronger  and  stronger. 

The  Apostle  says  (Col.  ii,  20)  :  "  If  ye  be. dead  with 
Christ  from  the  rudiments  of  the  world," —  "  If  ye  then 
be  risen  with  Christ,  seek  those  things  wdiich  are  above, 
where  Christ  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God.  Set  your 
affections  on  things  above,  not  on  things  on  the  earth.  For 
ye  are  dead,  and  your  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God. 
When  Christ  who  is  our  life  shall  appear,  then  shall  ye 
also  appear  with  him  in  glory."     (Col.  iii,  1-4,  etc.) 

The  subject  of  spiritual  baptism  —  or  death  to  sin  and 
18 


210  THE    EFFECTS    OF    SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM.  §  3D 

resurrection  to  a  life  of  holiness — realizes  an  affinity  to 
the  family  of  God,  that  he  is  bom  from  above,  by  the 
power  of  the  resurrection,  and  bound  for  heaven  —  that 
his  life  is  indeed  hid  with  Christ  in  God.  And  he  is  the 
happy  subject  of  a  conscious  assurance  of  his  union  with 
Christ  and  saving  interest  in  his  blood,  and  that  when 
Christ  who  is  our  life  shall  appear  the  second  time  without 
sin  unto  salvation,  then  he  also  shall  appear  with  him  in 
glory.  Not  only  with  a  soul  raised  and  renewed  into  the 
Divine  image,  but  also  with  an  immortal  body,  fashioned 
like  unto  the  glorious  resurrection  body  of  our  blessed 
Redeemer  —  a  child  of  the  resurrection,  and  an  heir  of 
immortality  and  eternal  life. 


SPIRITUAL    BAPTISM, 

CHAPTER  11. 

The  Interpretation  of  Eom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.   i,  12 

The  whole  ef  this  chapter  is  abridged  from  Pres, 
Beecher's  able  interpretation  of  these  important  passages. 
And  in  accommodating  it  to  the  comprehension  of  plain 
readers,  I  am  persuaded  that  I  have  generally  succeeded 
in  preserving  the  perspicuity  and  force  of  the  original ; 
and  have  omitted  nothing  which  tends  directly  to  the 
elucidation  of  these  difficult  texts,  The  interpretation 
extends  from  page  83  to  116  of  Beecher  on  Baptism. 

§  40.     Importance  of  a   correct  Interpretation   of 
Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12. 

The  conclusion  to  which  we  have  arrived  by  our  pre- 
vious inquiries  is  this :  Purification  is  enjoined  by  a 
specific  command,  but  no  particular  mode  of  purification 
is  enjoined.  Of  course,  any  individual  may  be  lawfully 
purified  in  the  way  that  he  prefers.  No  result  can  be 
more  desirable  than  this,  for  none  tends  more  directly  to 
harmonize  the  Church.  It  combines  the  two  fundamental 
requisites  for  union,  which  are,  1,  to  take  from  no  church 
anything  which  it  desires,  as  to  its  own  mode  of  purifica- 
tion ;  and  2,  to  authorize  each  church  to  regard  the  puri- 
fication of  others,  though  differing  from  its  own,  as  valid. 


212  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  asd  col,  ii,  12.  §  40 

Who,  that  loves  the  harmony  of  the  Church,  who,  that 
regards  the  feelings  and  wishes  of  Christ,  would  not 
rejoice  at  an  issue  so  auspicious  ?  What  can  be  more 
desirable  than  a  union  without  sacrifice  of  principle,  or 
loss  of  any  valued  practice  ?  But  this  result  secures  all 
this  ;  nay,  more,  it  would  give  to  our  Baptist  brethren, 
not  only  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  they  desire,  without 
diminution  or  loss,  but  add  to  it  the  sweet  persuasion, 
that  on  this  point,  all  their  Christian  brethren  are  also 
right,  and  can,  in  like  manner,  enjoy  the  mode  which 
they  prefer.  Thus  all  painful  barriers  to  communion  will 
at  once  be  taken  away,  the  middle  wall  ol  partition  will 
fall,  and  all,  in  Christian  love,  will  be  united  as  one  new 
man. 

In  proportion  then  to  the  desirableness  of  this  event,  is 
the  importance  of  a  radical  investigation  and  correct 
interpretation  of  Bom.  vi,  3,4,  and  Col.  ii,  12;  for  next 
to  the  word  baptizo,  these  have  been,  and  still  are,  the 
most  serious  obstacles  to  such  a  result.  As  I  have  before 
stated,  our  Baptist  brethren  regard  these  passages  as  an 
inspired  exposition  of  the  mode  of  baptism.  (See  §  4.) 
Nor  are  they  without  authority  for  interpreting  these 
texts  as  referring  to  the  mode  of  the  external  rite.  The 
opinions  of  the  Fathers  so  far  as  I  have  examined,  are 
entirely  with  them  ;  and  especially  the  influence  of  Chry- 
sostom  in  the  East,  and  of  Augustine  in  the  West, 
tended  to  give  it  currency  everywhere.  Besides,  it  is 
strongly  sustained  by  the  opinions  of  many  modern  critics, 
Of  these  it  is  enough  to  mention  Luther,  Jaspis,  Knapp, 
Rosenmuller,  Doddridge,  and  Barnes — none  of  them 
Baptists  by  profession. 

Of  course  we  need  not  wonder  that  our  Baptist  brethren 
feel  strong,  and  express  themselves  with  confidence,  and 
even  exultation,  in  speaking  of  these  passages.  Says  Dr. 
Carson,  page  144  :  "  I  value  the  evidence  of  these  pas- 


§  41  POINTS  AT  IS3CE,  213 

sages  so  highly,  that  I  look  on  them  as  perfectly  decisive. 
They  contain  God's  own  explanation  of  his  own  ordi- 
nance. And  in  this,  I  call  upon  my  unlearned  brethren 
to  admire  the  Divine  wisdom.  They  do  not  understand 
the  original,  and  the  adoption  of  the  words  baptise  and 
baptism  can  teach  them  nothing.  Translators,  by  adopt- 
ing the  Greek  word,  have  contrived  to  hide  the  meaning 
from  the  unlearned.  But  the  evidence  of  the  passages  in 
question  cannot  be  hid,  and  it  is  obvious  to  the  most 
unlearned.  The  Spirit  of  God  has  enabled  them  to  judge 
for  themselves  in  this  matter.  Whilst  the  learned  are 
lighting  about  baptizo,  and  certain  Greek  prepositions, 
let  the  unlearned  turn  to  Rom.  vi,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12," 
etc.  This  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  specimen  of  the  strength 
of  feeling  that  pervades  the  whole  body ;  and  if  so,  it  is 
plain  that  all  hopes  of  union  are  fallacious,  until  the  true 
interpretation  of  these  passages  is  ascertained.  Most 
cordially,  therefore,  do  I  unite  with  Dr.  Carson  in  inviting, 
not  the  unlearned  only,  but  all  —  learned  and  unlearned  — 
to  turn  to  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12. 

§  41.  Points  at  Issue  —  Principles  of  Reasoning, 

Let  us  first  present  in  full  these  remarkable  and  im- 
portant passages  of  the  word  of  God,  and  then  endeavor 
to  ascertain  upon  what  points  the  interpretation  of  them 
turns.  They  are  as  follows  :  "  Know  ye  not  that  so 
many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were 
baptized  into  his  death  ?  Therefore  we  are  buried  with 
him  by  baptism  into  death  :  that  like  as  Christ  was 
raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even 
so  we  also  should  wralk  in  newness  of  life."  Rom.  vi,  3, 
4.  "Buried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein  also  ye  are 
risen  with  him  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God, 
who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead."     Col.  ii,  12. 


214  ROM.  VI,  3,  4,  A5D    COL.  II,    12.  §  4i 

Upon  these  passages  two  distinct  questions  may  be 
raised  : 

1.  Is  the  baptism  of  the  believer  here  spoken  of  ,  external? 

2.  Are  the  burial  and  resurrection  of  the  believer  here 
spoken  of,  external  P 

I  here  assume  the  following  positions  or  principles,  the 
first  of  which  has  been  already  proved,  and  the  second  of 
which  is  so  obviously  true  as  to  need  no  proof. 

1.  The  philological  question,  as  to  the  import  of  bap- 
tizo,  neither  depends  upon  the  interpretation  of  this  passage, 
?ior  is  affected,  by  it.  Each  stands  upon  its  own  ground, 
and  must  be  decided  by  its  own  evidence.  And  if  it  were 
proved  that  external  baptism,  burial,  and  resurrection  are 
here  referred  to,  it  would  only  prove,  that  under  a  com- 
mand to  purify*  they  did  in  fact  purify  by  immersion. 
And  we  must  still  translate  the  passage,  "We  have  been 
buried  with  him  by  purification  into  his  death,"  —  not  by 
"  immersion "  into  his  death.  For  we  have  already 
•shown  that,  as  a  religious  term,  baptize  does  not  mean  to 
immerse,  but  solely  to  purify.  In  other  words,  we  could 
prove  immersion,  &c,  only  by  the  word  bury,  and  not  at 
all  by  the  word  baptize. 

2.  As  the  baptism  is,  so  is  the  burial.  That  is,  if  the 
baptism  is  external,  so  is  the  burial  ;  and  if  internal,  so  is 
the  burial.  We  are  buried  by  the  baptism  spoken  of, — 
we  have  been  buried  with  Him  by  baptism,  etc.,  Rom.  vi,  4. 
And  an  external  baptism  cannot  produce  an  internal  burial, 
nor  can  an  internal  baptism  produce  an  external  burial. 

§  42.  Position  to  be  proved. —  Sources  of  Evidence. 

We  now  proceed  to  consider  the  two  questions  above 
stated.  In  answering  them,  three  positions  have  been 
taken : 

1.  The  baptism  into  Christ  is  external,  and  of  course, 
the  burial  and  resurrection. 


§  24  POSITION    TO    BE    PROVE!).  215 

2.  The  baptism  is  external,  but  the  burial  and  resurrec* 
tion  are  internal. 

3.  The  baptism,  burial,  resurrection,  etc.,  are  all  inter- 
nal, and  the  passage  does  not  refer  to  the  external  rite  at 
all,  nor  derive  any  of  its  language  from  it ;  but  the 
language  would  have  been  just  as  it  is,  if  the  rite  had  been 
administered  by  sprinkling  alone,  or  even  if  there  had 
been  no  external  rite. 

The  third  is  the  position  which  I  intend  to  maintain,  and 
it  is  obviously  the  direct  antagonist  of  the  first,  the  usual 
position  of  the  Baptists,  and  also  of  the  Fathers  and 
others.  The  second  is  an  intermediate  position,  advocated 
by  Wardlow,  Prof.  Stewart,  and  others,  but,  as  I  have 
indicated  above,  inconsistent  with  itself;  because,  if  the 
baptism  is  external,  so  must  be  the  burial  and  the  resur- 
rection. It  is  on  this  ground  that  Prof.  Ripley  reasons, 
and  I  think  conclusively,  against  Prof.  Stuart.  "This 
opinion,"  (that  the  burial  is  internal,)  he  says,  "seems 
effectually  opposed  by  the  circumstance  that  the  burying 
is  performed  by  baptism,  an  external  rite,  p.  58.  And  all 
who  admit  that  the  external  rite  is  here  sjDoken  of,  must, 
it  seems  to  me,  be  inevitably  driven  to  Prof.  Ripley's 
ground.  But,  believing  as  I  do,  that  the  external  rite  is 
not  meant,  and  that  the  external  interpretation  of  this 
passage  is  not  only  false,  but  injurious  to  the  cause  of 
truth  and  holiness,  I  shall  proceed  to  state  the  evidence 
which  seems  to  me  to  overthrow  the  first  position,  and  to 
establish  the  last.  My  leading  arguments  may  be  arranged 
under  the  four  following  heads  : 

1.  Evidence  from  the  course  of  the  Apostle's  argument, 
and  the  logical  exigencies  of  the  passages. 

2.  Evidence  from  the  language  employed,  as  to  spiritual 
death,  burial,  resurrection,  etc. 

3.  Evidence  from  the  congruity  of  the  interpretation, 
with  the  general  system  of  truth. 


216  ROM.  VI,   3,   4,   AND  COL.  Ill,    12.  §  43 

4.  Evidence  from  the  moral  tendencies  and  effects  of 
each  interpretation. 

§  43.  The  Course  of  the  Arguments,  and  the  Logical 
Exigencies. 

Let  us  then  consider,  1,  the  course  of  the  Apostle's 
argument,  and  2,  the  logical  exigencies,  or  demands,  of 
Eom.  vi,  3,  4.  We  shall  consider  Col.  ii,  12,  by  itself. 
The  argument  involves  three  points  : 

1.  An  objection  stated  in  the  form  of  a  question,  verse 
1  :  "  What  then?  shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace 
may  abound?"  Does  not  the  doctrine  of  the  free  for- 
giveness of  the  greatest  sin,  by  the  abounding  grace  of 
God  through  Christ,  lead  to  this  result  ?  Or,  to  put  it 
in  the  form  of  a  positive  objection,  the  doctrine  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  by  free  grace,  tends  to  relax  the  power 
of  motives  to  holiness,  and  to  encourage  men  to  live  in 
sin. 

2.  A  reply,  verse  2  :  "  God  forbid.  How  shall  we 
who  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any  longer  therein  ?  "  Here 
Paul  speaks  in  the  name  of  all  who  are  really  forgiven, 
and  virtually  asserts  that  all,  who  are  in  fact  forgiven, 
are,  of  course,  dead  to  sin,  and  cannot  live  any  longer 
therein,  implying,  of  necessity,  that  the  system  itself  pro- 
duces this  effect  on  all  who  experience  its  true  and  genuine 
influence,  and  that  it  is  necessary  and  universal.  In  brief, 
the  objection  is,  Does  not  the  system  encourage  men  to 
sin  ?  The  answer  is,  No,  it  makes  them  dead  to  sin,  so 
that  they  cannot  live  any  longer  in  it. 

3.  A  proof  that  the  fact  alleged  is  true,  i.  e.  that  the 
system  does  tend  to  holiness,  with  immense  power,  and 
not  to  sin,  verses  3-11. 

The  question  now  at  once  arrises,  What  is  good  and 
logical  proof  of  such  a  point,  i.  e.,  of  the  true  and  natu- 


§  42  COURSE  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  217 

ral  operation  of  a  moral  system  on  the  human  mind  ?  In 
answering  this,  we  shall  perceive  at  once  the  logical  exi- 
gencies, or  demands,  of  the  passage. 

Can  such  proof  then  be  found  in  external  rites,  solemn 
promises,  and  significant  symbols  ?  Or  must  we  look 
for  it  in  a  clear  statement  of  the  internal,  natural,  and 
inevitable  operation  of  the  system,  as  a  system,  on  the 
mind  ?  As  to  the  first,  I  need  only  ask,  what  system,  be 
it  good  or  bad,  is  destitute  of  significant  rites  and  sym- 
bols, and  of  solemn  confession  and  promises  ?  Papists 
and  Protestants,  Arminians,  Calvinists,  Unitarians, 
Campbellites,  Mormons  —  all  have  them ;  even  the  rite 
of  immersion  is  common  to  some  of  the  worst  with  some 
of  the  best.  But  in  what  case  have  these  things  given  to 
any  system  a  regenerating  or  sanctifying  power  sufficient 
to  uproot  and  destroy  the  desperate  depravity  of  the  human 
heart  ?  Is  it  not  a  well  known  fact,  that  the  radical 
effects  of  all  systems  depend,  not  on  external  rites  and 
solemn  promises,  but  on  principles.  These  are  the  inter- 
nal and  germinating  power  of  every  system,  and  just  so 
far  as  these  are  adapted  to  act  on  the  human  mind,  so  is 
the  system.  And  as  a  general  fact,  those  who  depend 
most  on  promises,  professions,  and  external  rites,  as  a 
means  of  subduing  sin,  have  the  least  success. 

In  order,  then,  to  make  out  a  sound  logical  argument, 
it  is  necessary  that  Paul  should  exhibit  the  internal  opera- 
tion on  the  mind,  of  the  doctrine  of  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  by  faith,  and  prove  that  it  does  in  fact  cause  all  who 
come  under  its  influence,  to  be  dead  to  sin.  This,  accord- 
ing to  the  internal  mode  of  interpretation,  he  does ;  but 
according  to  the  external  mode,  he  does  not.  The  one  states 
the  actual  and  inward  effects  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
through  faith.  The  other  merely  refers  us  to  the  influence 
of  an  external  rite.  That  this  is  so  let  us  now  proceed  to 
establish. 

19 


218  rom.  vi,  3.  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  §  43 

The  fundamental  points  in  the  interpretation  are  four: 

1.  Ebaptisthemen  is  to  be  interpreted,  we  have  been 
'purified  or  purged,  in  the  legal  or  sacrificial  sense,  to 
denote  the  actual  purification  or  purgation  of  the  con- 
science from  guilt  by  the  Spirit.  This  is  the  spiritual 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  designed  influence  of 
the  system  on  the  mind  of  a  convicted  sinner.  Of  this 
state  of  mind  we  have  the  following  heatitiful  description 
from  the  pen  of  Cowper  : 

Sweet  was  the  time  when  first  I  felt 

The  Saviour's  pardoning  blood, 
Applied  to  cleanse  my  soul  from  guilt, 

And  bring  me  home  to  God. 

Thus,  by  this  mode  of  translation,  we  pass  at  once,  not  to 
an  external  rite,  but  to  the  actual  influence  of  the  system 
on  the  mind. 

2.  Ebaptisthemen eis  Christon,  (we  have  been  baptized 
into  Christ,)  is  to  be  interpreted  as  indicating  no  external 
rite,  but  an  actual  union  with  Christ,  by  this  spiritual 
purgation,  or  sense  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  This 
consciousness  of  forgiving  love  awakens  corresponding 
love,  and  produces  an  entire  union  to  Christ,  and  devo- 
tedness  to  him.  "  Whom  having  not  seen,  ye  love  ;  and 
in  whom,  though  now  ye  see  him  not,  yet  believing,  ye 
rejoice  with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  joy."  This  is  a 
spiritual  baptism  into  Christ,  involving  a  real  and  vital 
union  to  him. 

3.  As  the  baptism  into  Christ  is  thus  internal  and 
spiritual,  so  are  the  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  spoken 
of  as  produced  by  it ;  and  these  are  to  be  regarded  as  the 
genuine  and  universal  effects  of  the  system  of  forgiveness 
by  faith  in  Christ. 

4.  These  changes  involve  a  crucifixion  to  sin,  a  death 
to  it,  a  burial  as  it  regards  the  old  man,  and  a  resurrection 
as  it  regards    the    new   man,  analogous  to  the   natural 


§  43  COURSE  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  219 

crucifixion,  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  Christ, 
Thus  the  propositions  of  Paul  may  be  briefly  reduced  to 
this  :  By  forgiveness  of  sins  we  are  truly  and  vitally  united 
to  Christ,  and  the  inevitable  effect  of  this  union  is  to 
exterminate,  radically  and  entirely,  our  old  sinful  charac- 
ter, and  to  produce  a  new  one,  pure  and  holy  like  his 
own.*  That  these  propositions,  if  true,  do  make  a 
logical  argument,  none  can  deny.     Thus, 

Objection.  The  system  of  forgiveness  of  sins  through 
faith  in  Christ  tends  to  embolden  men  in  sin. 

Reply.  It  does  not ;  for  all  who  are  truly  forgiven  are 
dead  to  sin,  and  cannot  live  in  it  any  longer.  This  is 
the  natural  and  necessary  consequence  of  the  system. 

Proof.  All  who  are  forgiven  are  united  by  it  to  Christ, 
and  it  is  the  inevitable  consequence  of  this  union  to  cause 
death  unto  sin,  and  life  unto  God.     *     *     * 

What,  therefore,  the  internal  interpretation  affirms,  as 
it  regards  the  natural  influence  of  the  system  of  forgive- 
ness by  faith  in  Christ,  is  an  obvious  and  well  known 
truth  ;  it  is  true  concerning  this  system  alone.  The 
argument,  then,  is  not  only  perfectly  logical,  but  one  of 
the  highest  importance  and  power.  See  the  nature  of 
spiritual  baptism,  §  38. 

But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  external  interpretation  ? 
How  does,  or  how  can  an  external  rite  prove  that  the 
system  of  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ  produces 
death  to  sin  ?  The  reply  of  the  Fathers  would  have  been 
logical  if  true.     They  held  that  Christ  gave  to  the  waters 

*  This  view  of  the  spiritual  import  of  Rom.  iii,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  11,  12, 
is  not  peculiar  to  Pedobaptists  ;  it  was  the  view  of  Robinson  the  Baptist 
historian,  and  of  the  late  Dr.  Judson,  missionary  to  India.  Mr.  Judson 
says  of  Col.  ii,  11,  12  :  "  The  Apostle  is  here  speaking  of  sftiritual  cir- 
cumcision and  spiritual  baptism.  In  spiritual  baptism,  or  regeneration, 
believers  are  spiritually  ;  crucified  with  Christ,'  die  with  him,  are  buried 
with  him.  and  rise  with  him  to  'newness  of  life,'  and  to  new  obedience." 
—  Encyc.  Eel.  Knoxcl.  Art.  Bap. 


220  ROM.  VI,  3,   4,  AND  COL.  II,  12.  §  43 

a  purging  power  ;  it  was  holy  water  ;  there  was  a  mys- 
terious energy  to  destroy  sin,  and  to  communicate  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Alas  for  the  religion  of  Christ  !  for  centu- 
ries long  and  dark  this  was  almost  the  only  view  of  the 
Church.  This  view,  therefore,  is  not  only  to  be  rejected 
as  false,  hut  to  be  abhorred  as  unutterably  pernicious. 

We  come  then  to  all  that  remains  to  the  moral  influ- 
ence of  the  solemnity  of  the  baptismal  promise  and  rite, 
as  exhibited  by  Prof.  Chase,  and  others  ;  or  to  the  argu- 
ment from  its  import,  as  stated  by  Dr.  Carson.  Accord- 
ing to  the  first  view,  those  who  have  been  duly  immersed 
are  supposed  to  be  thus  addressed  :  "  Reflect  how  solemn 
your  professions  and  promises  in  the  hour  of  baptism, 
and  how  significant  the  rite  by  which  your  duty  was 
shadowed  forth,  and  your  relations  to  Christ  presented  to 
the  mind.  Did  you  not  solemnly  promise,  when  im- 
mersed, to  die  unto  sin  and  to  live  unto  God  ?  And  as 
you  sank  into  a  watery  grave,  and  came  forth  once  more 
to  the  vital  air,  did  you  not  solemnly  show  forth  your 
duty  to  die  unto  sin,  and  rise  to  a  new  and  holy  life,  and 
also  the  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  by  which 
your  salvation  was  procured." 

*  *  *  In  fidelity  to  God,  I  am  constrained  to  ask  : 
What  does  all  this  amount  to,  unless  it  be  to  throw  the 
main  and  peculiar  reforming  power  of  the  Gospel,  upon 
the  influence  to  be  exerted  by  the  solemnities  of  one 
external  rite  ?  And  is  it  come  to  this  ?  Is  this  all  the 
answer  that  even  an  Apostle  can  give  to  an  objection 
against  the  Gospel,  so  deep,  so  fundamental  ?  Are  sol- 
emn promises  and  the  moral  power  of  one  rite,  the  vital 
and  essential  elements  of  the  reforming  power  of  the 
Gospel?     *     *      * 

But  Dr.  Carson  and  others  will  say  :  That  is  not  our 
view.  We  hold  that  Paul  uses  the  symbolical  import  of 
baptism,  to  prove  that  believers  are  in  fact  dead  to  sin. 


§  44  MODE    OF    SPEECH    EMPLOYED.  221 

To  this  I  reply  :  It  does  not  help  the  case  ;  for  any- 
external  rite,  in  such  a  course  of  argument,  cannot  prove 
any  such  thing.  How  can  the  operation  of  any  system 
on  the  mind  be  proved,  except  by  looking  directly  at  the 
mind  itself,  and  considering  the  effect  of  the  system  on  it  ? 
*  *  *  The  obvious  fact  is,  that  all  allusion  to  an 
external  rite  is  here  out  of  place.  It  destroys  the  train  of 
reasoning,  perplexes  and  confuses  the  mind,  and  causes  a 
deep  and  painful  feeling  of  the  entire  absence  of  logical 
proof.  Hence  we  need  not  wonder,  that  logical  minds 
have  felt  this.  Mr.  Barnes  says  openly,  that  there  is  no 
reasoning  here,  but  mere  popular  appeal  ;  and  truly,  ac- 
cording to  the  external  mode  of  interpretation,  there  is 
none.  But  is  this  the  place  for  popular  appeal  ?  If  ever 
an  objection  deserved  a  thorough  and  logical  reply,  this 
is  the  one.  Moreover,  up  to  this  point  we  have  had 
reasoning,  cogent  and  condensed.  Why  suppose  a  break 
in  the  chain  here  ?  Above  all  other  places,  this  ought  to 
be  strictly  logical,  and  unanswerably  strong ;  and  so 
indeed  it  is.  There  is  no  break,  there  is  no  nawr ;  there 
is  no  relying  on  popular  appeal ;  there  is  no  magnifying 
of  the  power  of  promises,  professions,  and  external  rites. 
But  there  is  a  close  logical  and  unanswerable  argument, 
from  the  necessary  operation  of  the  gospel  on  the  human 
mind.  But  this  will  become  still  more  evident,  when  we 
proceed  to  consider  the  requisitions  of  the  terms  employed, 
as  to  spiritual  crucifixion,  death,  burial,  etc. 

§  44.  The  Mode  of  Speech  Employed,  as  to  Spiritual 
Death,  Burial,  etc. 

We  have  great  reason  for  gratitude,  that  the  mode  of 
speech,  used  in  these  disputed  passages,  is  not  limited  to 
them,  but  exists  in  numerous  other  places,  where  it  can  be 
the  subject  of  no  fair  dispute.  The  mode  of  speech  in 
question,  is  not  accidental,  without  rules,  and  obscure, 


222  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  §  44 

but  based  in  principles  clear,  certain,  and  consistent.  It 
is  found  chiefly  in  the  writings  of  Paul,  but  it  clearly 
occurs  in  those  of  Peter.     Its  principles  are  these  : 

1.  The  spiritual  crucifixion,  towards  which  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  tends,  as  already  shown,  is  a  work 
involving  great  and  intense  pain,  and  to  induce  a  man  to 
summon  all  his  resolution  and  energy  to  do  it  thoroughly, 
powerful  motives  are  needed. 

2.  Such  is  the  nature  of  man,  that  the  most  powerful 
motives,  by  which  he  can  be  influenced,  must  be  derived 
from  the  following  sources  :  (1.)  Affecting  examples  of 
fortitude  and  suffering.  (2.)  Infinite  blessings  received 
through  a  suffering  friend.  (3.)  The  deep  interest  of  that 
friend  in  our  suffering  for  him.  The  loss  of  fortitude  to 
endure  suffering  for  the  general  good,  and  a  love  of  indo- 
lence and  ease,  are  the  universal  characteristics  of  our 
depraved  nature,  and  are  the  hardest  of  all  to  be  overcome. 
But  if  the  idea  can  be  fully  thrown  into  the  mind,  and 
kept  daity  before  it,  that  our  highest  benefactor  himself 
suffered  with  infinite  fortitude,  and  not  only  so,  but  that 
he  thus  suffered  for  us,  and  not  only  so,  that  he  infinitely 
and  ardently  desires  to  form  the  same  traits  in  us,  and 
rejoices  to  see  us,  from  love  to  him,  crucify  the  spirit  of 
indolence,  indulgence,  and  ease,  and  learn  to  rejoice  in  a 
life  of  fortitude  and  suffering  for  the  good  of  others,  like 
his  own,  then  motives  are  concentrated  and  accumulated, 
the  power  of  which  no  man  can  resist. 

3.  It  is  the  design  of  this  mode  of  speech  to  combine 
all  these  varied  motives  in  one  condensed  appeal.  The 
mode  adopted  in  this,  Christ  and  the  believer  are  repre- 
sented as  mutually  interested  in  each  other,  and  both  are 
suffering  for,  and  with,  the  other.  The  part  in  each,  that 
suffers,  is  called  by  the  same  name, —  the  flesh.  But  in 
the  one  case,  it  is  external  and  material,  the  body  of 
Christ.     In  the  other,  it  is  internal  and  spiritual  —  the 


§   44  MODE  OF  SPEECH  EMPLOYED-  223 

body  of  sin,  the  old  man.  As  each  is  spoken  of  as  hav- 
ing a  body,  so  each  body  is  represented  as  composed  of 
members  ;  in  the  one  case,  external  and  material  as  before, 
in  the  other  case,  internal  and  spiritual,  i.  e.,  various  and 
deep-rooted  habits  of  sin,  to  be  eradicated  by  a  process 
as  painful  as  to  cut  off  a  right  hand  or  foot,  or  to  pluck 
out  a  right  eye.  Thus  we  have  the  body  of  sin,  and  its 
members,  the  old  man  and  his  members,  which  are  the 
same  as  the  flesh,  with  its  affections  and  lusts. 

All  these  then  are  spoken  of  as  to  be  crucified,  eradi- 
cated, and  destroyed  ;  but  as  the  work  is  excessively 
painful,  and  flesh  and  blood  shrink  from  its  thorough  exe- 
cution, the  example  of  Christ,  as  enduring  intense  pain 
in  His  flesh,  i.  e.,  His  body  and  members,  in  the  agonies 
of  crucifixion  for  us,  is  presented  as  an  example  for  us  to 
imitate,  in  our  moral  crucifixion  for  Him.  This  entire 
train  of  thought  is  fully  set  forth  in  1  Peter  iv,  1  :  "  For- 
asmuch then  as  Christ  hath  suffered  for  as  in  the  flesh, 
arm  yourselves  likewise  with  the  same  mind,  (i.  e.  sum- 
mon all  your  energy  to  suffer  for  Him  in  the  flesh  ;)  for 
he  that  hath  suffered  in  the  flesh  hath  ceased  from  sin." 
In  other  words,  he  who  hath  crucified  the  flesh,  with  the 
affections  and  lusts  thereof,  hath  ceased  from  sin.  Only 
the  internal  sen.se  is  here  possible  ;  for  crucifying  the  flesh, 
in  this  sense,  does  destroy  sin  ;  bodily  suffering  does  not. 
The  final  result  is  then  stated,  "  that  he  no  longer  should 
live  the  rest  of  his  time  in  the  flesh  (i.  e.  in  the  body,  or 
in  this  world, )  to  the  lusts  of  men,  but  to  the  will  of  God." 
Thus  the  appeal  is  thorough  and  complete.  And  how 
great  is  its  power.     *••.-•*...'.* 

This  mode  of  speech  is  carried  out  in  other  parts  of 
scripture,  in  great  minuteness  of  detail,  but  always  on 
this  principle,  that  the  sufferings  of  Christ  are  supposed 
to  be  fully  before  the  mind,  as  an  object  of  daily  medita- 
tion and  imitation,  and  that  whatever  took  place  naturally 
in  connexion  with  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  has  something 


224 


ROM.  VI,  3,  4,  AXD  COL.  II,    12. 


§44 


to  correspond  with  it  spiritually,  in  its  connection  with 
the  sufferings  of  believers.     Thus  : 


CHRIST. 

1.  Christ  suffered  naturally. 

2.  Christ  in  His  flesh,  i.  e.,  body 
natural. 

3.  The  members  of  Christ's  body 
were  crucified. 

4.  Christ's  body   died   entirely. 
All  natural  life  was  totally  extinct. 

5.  Christ's  natural  death  was  for 
sin. 

6.  Christ  was  buried  naturally, 
and  became  invisible  in  the  grave. 

7.  Christ  rcse  naturally,  and  ap- 
peared in  new  external  glory. 

8.  It    was    the  mighty   natural 
power  of  God  that  raised  Christ. 

9.  Christ  after  His  resurrection 
sat  down  in  heavenly  places  bodily. 

10.  Christ  dies  naturally  no  more  ; 
death  hath  no  more  dominion  over 
Him. 


THE   BELIEVER. 

1 .  The  believer  suffers  spiritually. 

2.  The  believer  in  his  flesh,  i.  e., 
body  of  sin. 

3.  The  members  of  the  body  of 
sin  are  to  be  crucified. 

4.  The  body  of  sin,  the  old  man, 
the  flesh,  is  to  be  entirely  destroyed. 

5.  The  believer's  spiritual  death 
is  to  sin. 

6.  The  believer  is  to  be  buried 
spiritually,  and  to  become  invisible 
in  his  old  character. 

7.  The  believer  is  to  rise  spiritu- 
ally, and  appear  in  a  new,  holy, 
glorious  spiritual  character. 

8.  It  is  the  mighty  power  of  God 
through  faith  that  raises  the  be- 
liever. 

9.  Believers  sit  down  ly  faith  in 
heavenly  places,  after  their  resur- 
rection. 

10.  Believers  die  in  sin  no  more  ; 
death  spiritual  hath  no  more  domi- 
nion over  them. 


This  process  is  sometimes  stated  antithetically,  and  in 
separate  parts,  but  it  is  also  expressed  in  abbreviated  form 
of  speech,  formed  by  compounding  the  word  denoting 
the  action  with  sin,*  (with,)  in  all  which  cases  is  implied. 
I  do  or  suffer  that  spiritually,  which  Christ  did  or  suffered 
naturally.  So  believers  are  said  to  suffer,  be  crucified, 
die,  be  buried,  be  restored  to  life,  be  raised,  sit  in  heavenly 
places,  and  live  forever  with  Christ,  i.  e.,  spiritually,  as  in 
His  case  naturally. 

The  reason  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  two  facts  : 

*  For  example,  sumpascho,  (to  suffer  together  with,)  surtauroo  (to 
crucify  together  with,)  sunapothnesko,  (to  die  together  with,)  sun- 
thapto,  (to  bury  together  with,)  suzoopoieo,  (to  quicken  together  with,) 
etmegeiro,  ( to  raise  together  with,)  sugkathizo,  (to  sit  down  with.)  etc. 


§  44  MODE    OF    SPEECH    EMPLOYED.  225 

1.  Christ  suffered,  died,  etc.,  naturally,  in  order  to 
secure,  not  only  forgiveness,  but  also  these  very  spiritual 
changes  in  us,  and  it  is  the  power  of  His  example  and 
love  which,  in  fact,  produces  them.  As  Christ,  therefore, 
had  all  these  tilings  in  view,  when  He  suffered,  and  as  His 
sufferings  rendered  them  sure,  the  spiritual  sufferings  of 
believers  are  looked  on  as  virtually  included  in  the  natural 
sufferings  of  Christ:  their  death  to  sin  in  His  for  it  — 
their  spiritual  burial,  resurrection,  and  eternal  life,  in 
His  natural  burial,  resurrection,  and  eternal  life.  For, 
surely  one  series  did  involve  and  render  certain  the  other  ; 
and  so  when  one  came  to  pass  actually,  the  other  did 
virtually. 

2.  The  ardent  love  to  Christ  which  ever  glowed  in  the 
breast  of  Paul,  led  him  to  devise  this  mode  of  speech,  as 
the  best  adapted  to  express  his  unutterable  affection  for 
his  Saviour,  his  all-absorbing  admiration  of  his  charac- 
ter, and  his  infinite  and  intense  desire  to  be  in  all  things 
one  with  Him.  Hence  the  least  remains  of  sin  he  regarded 
as  excluding  him  from  a  perfect  experimental  and  sympa- 
thetic knowledge  of  the  character  of  Christ ;  and,  by  self 
crucifixion,  to  reach  this  point  of  a  perfect  experimental 
sympathy  in  the  absolute  perfection  of  a  suffering  Saviour, 
was  the  summit  of  all  his  desires.  Hear  him  as  he  ex- 
claims, "  I  count  all  things  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the 
knowledge  of  Jesus  Christ,  my  Lord,  that  I  may  know 
Him  and  the  power  of  His  resurrection,  and  the  fellowship 
of  His  sufferings,  being  made  conformable  unto  His 
death."  And  again  :  I  am  crucified  with  Christ ;  never- 
theless I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me."  And 
again  :  "  God  forbid  that  I  should  glory,  save  in  the  cross 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  the  world  is  crucified 
unto  me,  and  I  unto  the  world."  The  various  forms  of 
this  mode  of  speech,  in  all  its  range,  are  not  the  mere 
offspring  of  a  luxuriant  poetic  imagination.  They  are  the 
sacred,  elevated,  spiritual  language  of  unutterable   love, 


226  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  §  44 

the  full  power  and  beauty  of  which  no  eye  can  see,  or 
heart  feel,  that  has  never  felt  the  emotion  from  which  it 
sprang.  And  sad  was  that  day  for  the  primitive  church, 
when  her  heart  ceased  to  beat  responsive  to  that  of  Paul 
and  darkness  fell  upon  the  spiritual  import  of  his  sacred 
words. 

To  illustrate  these  principles  by  quotations  in  detail, 
would  exceed  my  limits.     I  shall  only  refer  to  the  follow-  , 
ing  passages  of  scripture,  on  which  they  are  based,  and 
which,  in  order  to  see  the  whole  truth  upon  the  subject, 
ought  to  be  carefully  examined. 

In  Eph.  i,  19-23,  and  ii,  1—7,  natural  death,  resurrec- 
tion, etc.,  in  Christ,  are  viewed  analogically  with  death 
in  sin,  resurrection  from  sin,  etc.,  in  believers  ;  and  the 
power  of  God,  raising  Christians  by  faith,  is  compared 
to  His  natural  power  in  raising  Christ,  and  is  said  to  be 
analogical  to  it.  In  Phil,  iii,  10-21,  Paul  desires  to  know 
fully,  and  in  a  spiritual  sense,  that  which  corresponds  by 
analogy  to  these  natural  changes  in  Christ,  —  1,  suffering  ; 
2,  death  ;  3,  resurrection  ;  4,  experience  of  divine  power. 
There  is  not  the  least  allusion  to  his  own  natural  resur- 
rection, here  the  law  of  analogy  totally  forbids  it.  See 
sec.  39,  3,  (2.)  In  Col.  ii,  20,  and  iii,  1-4,  we  have,  1, 
death  to  the  world  with  Christ  ;  2,  a  resutrrecion  with 
Christ,  and  a  sympathy  with  the  things  where  Christ  is, 
producing  an  internal  and  hidden  life  in  him.  Both  of 
these  changes  in  the  believer  are  internal  and  spiritual, 
and  in  Christ  external. 

See  also  Gal.  vi,  14  ;  1  Peter  iv,  1,  2  ;  Gal.  ii,  19,  20  ; 
Col.  iii,  5-14  ;  Gal.  v,  24.  To  these  add  Ram.  vi,  1-13 ; 
and  Col.  ii,  11-13.  Some  of  these  have  been  referred  to 
before,  and  the  last  two  contain  the  passage  in  dispute ; 
but  I  refer  to  them  now,  in  order  to  present  the  scripture 
evidence  in  a  single  group.  One  thing  more  deserves  our 
notice  in  this  place.  Two  spiritual  states  are  sometimes 
used  as  analogical  to  the  death  of  Christ, —  one  death  in 


§  44  MODE    OF    SPEECH    EMPLOYED.  227 

sin,  as  in  Eph.  ii,  1-7,  and  Col.  ii,  11-13,  the  other, 
death  to  sin  by  moral  crucifixion,  as  in  Rom.  vi,  1-13,  and 
Phil,  iii,  10-21.  But  in  no  case  is  the  fundamentel  law 
of  the  analogy  disregarded,  i.  e.,  that  the  states  or  changes 
in  believers  are  spiritual  and  internal,  those  of  Christ 
natural  and  external.  In  the  sense  of  death  in  sin,  more- 
over, they  are  never  said  to  be  dead  with  Christ ;  for,  to 
secure  such  a  death  in  them,  He  did  not  aim  ;  but  their 
death  in  sin  is  merely  spoken  of  as  calling  for  the  exer- 
cise of  the  mighty  power  of  God  to  raise  them  up,  just 
as  Christ's  material  death  demanded  almighty  natural 
power  in  order  to  raise  Him  up. 

The  inferences  which  I  draw  from  this  exhibition  of 
the  mode  of  speech  employed,  are  these  : 

1.  The  general  law  of  analogy  demands  the  internal 
sense  throughout  the  whole  of  Rom.  vi,  1-13,  and  Col. 
ii,  11-13.  Look  at  the  preceding  columns  of  parallel 
analogies.  Of  these  all  but  six  and  seven  are  undeniably 
internal  and  spiritual  on  one  side,  and  external  and 
natural  on  the  other.  By  what  law  can  eight  out  of  ten, 
in  a  connected  series,  be  internal  and  spiritual,  and  the 
other  two  external  and  physical  ? 

2.  Of  these  two,  oue  —  resurrection  —  is  clearly  proved, 
in  the  analogous  passages,  to  be  used  in  a  spiritual  sense. 
See  Eph.  ii,  5,  6,  and  Col.  iii,  1.  Does  not  the  language 
employed  then  demand  that  sense  here  ? 

3.  The  resurrection  in  Col.  ii,  11—13,  is  proved  by 
internal  evidence,  to  be  spiritual ;  for  it  is  by  faith.  Com- 
pare this  now  with  precisely  the  same  idea  in  Eph.  i,  18- 
20,  and  ii,  4-6,  Phil,  iii,  10,  11,  Col.  iii,  1  ;  and  who 
can  doubt  ?  So  in  keeping  believers,  God  exercises  his 
mighty  power  through  faith,  1  Pet.  i,  5  :  "  Who  are  kept 
by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation."  So 
in  Col.  ii,  12  :  "  Ye  are  risen  with  him  through  the  faith 
of  the  operation  of  God  ;  "  "  ye  were  raised  with  him, 
by  that  faith,  through  which  the  power  of  God  exerts 


228  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  §  44 

itself."     Of  course,  if  the  resurrection  is  spiritual,  so  is 
the  burial. 

4.  In  the  phrase,  thanaton  autou  (his  death)  in  Rom. 
vi,  3,  the  law  of  analogy  requires  autou  (his)  to  be 
regarded  as  the  genitive  of  similitude,  i.  e.  a  death  like 
his,  or  analogical  to  it.  This  use  of  the  genitive  is 
exceedingly  common  ;  as  in  Jude  11,  the  way  of  Cain, 
the  error  of  Balaam,  and  the  gainsaying  of  Core,  mean  a 
way,  error,  and  gainsaying,  like  that  of  Cain,  Balaam, 
and  Core.  But  to  put  it  beyond  all  doubt,  in  verse  5  it 
is  expressed  in  full  —  to  homoiomati  ton  thanatou  autou 
"the  likeness  of  his  death,"  i.  e.  a  spiritual  death,  like 
his  natural  death. 

5.  Finally,  the  mode  of  speech,  as  it  regards  both 
spiritual  baptism,  and  spiritual  crucifixion  and  death, 
authorizes  and  requires  us  thus  to  interpret  Rom.  vi,  3, 
4,  and  Col.  ii,  12. 

Know  ye  not  that  so  many  of  us,  as  have  been  purified 
into  Christ,  (i.  e.  truly  united  to  Christ  by  the  forgiveness 
of  sins, )  have  been,  by  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  subjected 
to  a  spiritual  death,  like  his  natural  death  ?  Therefore 
as  he  was  naturally  buried,  so  are  we  spiritually  buried 
by  that  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  subjected  us  to  a  spir- 
itual death.  That,  like  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the 
dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should 
walk  in  newness  of  life.  Rom.  vi,  3,  4.  As  he  was 
buried  naturally,  so  were  ye  spiritually  buried  in  the  for- 
giveness of  your  sins,  in  which  ye  also  rose  spiritually  as 
he  did  naturally,  by  that  faith  through  which  is  exerted 
the  power  of  that  God,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead. 
Col.  ii,  12.  From  the  whole  context,  nothing  can  be 
more  certain  than  the  spiritual  sense  of  this  passage.  We 
have,  in  verse  11,  internal  circumcision,  and  putting  off 
the  body  of  the  flesh  ;  in  verse  12,  a  resurrection  by 
faith ;  in  verse  13,  an  internal  death  in  sin,  and  an 
internal    restoration  to  life.      Who    then    can  have   the 


§  45       CONGRUITY  OF  THE  SYSTEM  OF  TRUTH.       229 

least  ground  for  calling  the  burial  an  external  burial  ? 
So  Rom.  vi,  6,  Paul  expressly  states  that  all  that  he  has 
said  of  the  death  of  the  believer  is  to  be  understood  of  the 
death  of  the  old  man,  and  the  destruction  of  the  body  of 
sin.  But  of  course  the  burial  and  resurrection  are  as  the 
death. 

§  45.  The  Congrltty  of  the  Interpretation  with  the 
General  System  of  Truth. 
The  system  of  truth  is  but  one.  Hence  all  truth  is 
consistent  with  itself;  and  the  more  we  investigate  its 
minute  relations,  the  more  are  we  impressed  with  a  con- 
viction of  its  universal  harmony.  It  is  this  perception 
of  congruity  in  ten  thousand  minute  particulars,  which 
produces  what  we  call  a  sense  or  feeling  of  verisimilitude. 
And  as  the  operations  of  the  mind  are  often  so  rapid  as 
to  elude  analysis,  it  gives  rise  to  what  may  be  called  a 
presentiment  of  truth,  even  before  investigation.  Nor  is 
this  to  be  despised.  In  any  mind  familiar  with  the  great 
outlines  of  truth,  such  rapid  perceptions  of  the  agreement 
or  disagreement  of  a  given  view  with  those  great  outlines, 
have  a  real  and  logical  basis,  as  investigation  seldom 
fails  to  show.  But  when  investigation  has  taken  place, 
they  can  be  stated  and  exhibited  in  their  true  relations. 
Some  of  the  incongruities  of  the  external  system  of  inter- 
pretation with  the  existing  system  of  truth,  I  shall  proceed 
to  state : 

1.  It  is  incongruous  to  take  so  much  notice  of  one 
external  institution,  and  to  say  nothing  of  the  rest. 

2.  It  is  incongruous,  if  only  one  is  taken,  to  notice  one 
which  is  less  adapted  to  exert  a  great  moral  influence,  and 
not  to  notice  one  more  adapted. 

3.  It  is  incongruous  for  Paul  to  make  so  much  of  any 
external  rite,  and  especially  of  this. 

4.  It  is  still  more  incongruous  for  Jesus  Christ  to  do 
the  same. 


230  ROM.  VI.  3,  4,  AND  COL.  II,   12.  §  45 

5.  It  is  incongruous  to  establish  one  institution  to 
commemorate  the  death  of  Christ,  and  then  intrude  on  its 
province  by  another  established  for  a  different  end. 

1.  As  has  been  stated,  the  external  interpretation  rests 
the  reforming  power  of  the  gospel,  in  a  great  degree,  on 
the  influences  of  profession  and  promises  connected  with 
an  external  rite,  or  on  its  influence  in  presenting  truth  to 
the  mind.  xVnd  are  there  no  other  institutions  that  have 
the  same  external  power  ?  Are  there  no  solemn  vows 
around  the  Lord's  table,  and  no  intensely  affecting  truths 
as  to  the  death  of  Christ,  inculcated  by  it  ?  Does  the 
Sabbath  declare  nothing  of  a  heavenly  rest,  nor  bid  man 
to  die  to  the  world  ?  Has  the  ministry  and  the  preached 
word  no  reforming  power  ?  Why  say  so  much  of  the 
"  holy  tendency  "  of  immersion,  and  omit  all  these  ? 

2.  But  if  any  one  of  these  was  to  be  selected,  why 
choose  that  one  which  occurs  but  once  in  the  life  of  a 
believer,  and  omit  the  oft-recurring  influence  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  solemn  promises,  renewed  with  increasing 
fervency,  from  year  to  year,  till  death  closes  the  scene  ? 
Why  say  so  much  of  the  weaker,  and  yet  wholly  omit  the 
stronger  moral  power  ?  Is  there  indeed  in  this  one  rite 
a  secret  mystic  influence,  as  the  Fathers  thought,  operat- 
ing with  immense  power,  breaking  down  and  destroying 
all  sin,  actual  and  original,  at  one  blow  ?  If  not,  and  if 
it  stands  solely  en  the  ground  of  moral  influence,  in  im- 
pressing truth  by  symbols  on  the  mind,  then  the  selection 
of  this,  and  the  omission  of  the  Lord's  Supper  are  truly 
incongruous. 

3.  But  if  we  could  expect  such  an  effort  to  magnify  an 
external  rite  from  any  one,  we  should  least  of  all  expect 
it  from  Paul,  who  regarded  it,  in  comparison  with  the 
gospel,  as  of  so  little  weight,  that  he  thanked  God  that 
he  baptized  none  of  the  Corinthians,  but  Crispus  and 
Gaius,  and  the  household  of  Stephanas,  and  affirmed  that 
God  sent   him  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  gospel  ; 


§  45      COXGRUITY  OF  THE  SYSTEM  OF  TRUTH.      231 

and  who  gloried  in  nothing,  save  in  the  cross  of  Christ, 
Is  it  possible  that  this  same  Paul  has,  in  another  place, 
attempted  to  refute  a  fundamental  objection  to  this  same 
gospel,  by  magnifying  the  influence  of  this  same  external 
rite  ?  What  !  at  one  time  ascribe  to  it  in  some  way  such 
prodigious  power  to  eradicate  sin,  and  thank  God  that 
he  did  not  administer  it,  and  declares  that  he  was  not  sent 
to  do  it ! 

4.  Turn  now  to  Christ,  and  hear  him  (Matt,  xii,  7) 
rebuke  the  rigid  construers  of  external  observances,  by 
the  reproof:  "If  ye  had  known  what  that  meaneth,  / 
will  have  mercy  and  not  sacrifice,  ye  would  not  have  con- 
demned the  guiltless."  Again  :  when  Peter  desired  a 
more  complete  washing  than  the  rest  of  the  Disciples, 
(John  xiii,  10,)  hear  him  declare  that,  to  indicate  com- 
plete purification,  a  washing  of  the  feet  is  enough.  And 
can  we  believe  that  this  same  Jesus  inspired  his  beloved 
Paul  to  declare  that  jmrification  cannot  be  acceptably 
signified  in  more  than  one  way,  and  that  one,  immersion 
of  the  whole  body  ? 

5.  Finally,  the  Lord's  Supper  was  established  to  show 
forth  the  Lord's  atoning  death  until  he  should  come. 
Baptism  indicates  the  actual  purgation  of  the  heart  and 
conscience  from  sin,  when  the  atonement  is  applied  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  One  indicates  how  redemption  was 
procured  ;  the  other,  how  it  is  applied.  One  commemo- 
rates atonement  by  Christ  ;  the  other,  regeneration  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  But  the  external  interpretation  makes 
baptism  a  commemoration  of  three  things  :  1,  the  natural 
death  and  resurrection  of  Christ  ;  2,  the  spiritual  death 
and  resurrection  of  the  believer  ;  and  3,  the  natural  resur- 
rection of  the  believer.  Carson,  page  232.  This  is 
incongruous  indeed.  It  is  a  manifest  intrusion  into  the 
province  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  that  without  the  least 
reason  ;  and  it  nearly  loses  in  ideas  of  death  and  resurrec- 
tion, all  reference  to  purity.     In  truth,  it  seems  to  im- 


232  ROM.  VI,  O,  4,  AND  COL.  II,    12.  §  46 

merse,  and  almost  to  bury  out  of  sight,  the  main  idea  of 
the  rite,  and  to  bring  vividly  before  the  mind  the  funda- 
mental ideas  of  another  rite  ;  so  much  so,  that,  in  leading 
Prof.  Chase's  sermon  on  the  design  of  baptism,  one  can 
hardly  avoid  feeling  that  it  is  even  more  a  discourse  on 
the  design  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  than  a  discourse  on  the 
design  of  that  rite,  which  was  peculiarly  ordained  to  show 
forth  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Moreover,  so  far  as 
it  relates  to  purity,  it  is  not  the  direct  figure  of  the  reality, 
but  only  the  figure  of  a  figure  of  the  reality.  Purification 
is  the  reality.  But  immersion,  the  Baptists  all  affirm,  is 
the  figure  of  death.  But  death  is  only  the  figure  of  the 
destruction  of  the  old  man,  in  which  purification  actually 
consists.     But  of  purification  it  is  no  figure. 

Such,  then,  are  the  inconsistencies  and  incongruities, 
which  attend  all  the  efforts  to  force  an  external  sense  on  the 
baptism  and  burial  spoken  of  in  these  passages.  But 
assign  to  them  the  internal  and  spiritual  sense,  and  all  is 
consistent  and  clear.  For  it  rests  the  reforming  power  of 
the  gospel  on  no  external  rite,  and  intrudes  on  none. 
Nor  does  it  at  all  disagree  with  the  known  character  and 
feelings  of  Christ,  or  of  Paul,  but  perfectly  agrees  with 
both  ;  for  it  directs  us  at  once  to  the  internal  power  of  a 
spiritual  purgation  of  the  soul,  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  to 
unite  to  Christ,  and  thus  destroy  the  body  of  sin.  And 
it  presents  distinctly  and  fully  to  the  mind,  that  in  which 
Paul  was  wont  most  to  glory — the  cross  of  Christ,  and 
the  energy  of  the  gospel  as  the  power  of  God  to  salvation, 
to  every  one  that  believeth. 

§  46.  The  Moral  Tendencies  and  Effect  of  each 
Mode  of  Interpretation. 

The  principles  of  this  argument  are  plain.  They  are 
these : —  All  truth  in  its  permanent  influences,  tends  to 
holiness  ;  all  error,  to  sin.  Therefore,  if  we  can  show, 
a  priori,  that  tendency  to  sin,  in  any  view,  or  prove  by 


§  46  Moral  tendency  and  effects*  2S3 

an  appeal  to  facts  that  it  has  resulted  in  sin,  we  are  author- 
ized to  draw  the  conclusion,  that  the  view  is  false.  Never' 
theless,  in  this  mode  of  reasoning,  great  care  is  needed 
not  to  confound  mere  accidental  sequences  with  real  and 
genuine  effects.  To  guard  against  this,  note  the  following 
facts  I 

1.  Self  crucifixion  is,  of  all  things,  most  painful. 
From  all  suffering  men  naturally  shrink  ;  but  much  more 
from  the  pain  and  humiliation  attendant  on  subduing  sin, 
than  from  any  other.  Hence,  to  spare  the  old  man, 
pilgrimages,  fastings,  flagellations,  bodily  sufferings  of  all 
kinds,  and  even  death  itself,  are  willingly  endured. 

2.  Hence,  in  all  ages  a  universal  propensity  to  avoid 
the  real  and  internal  crucifixion  of  the  old  man,  by  a  reli- 
ance on  external  forms  of  mysterious  operations,  or  on 
an  authorized  ministry,  or  a  primitive  church,  or  solemn 
ceremonies,  rather  than  on  the  simple  and  sure  crucifixion 
of  the  flesh,  with  the  affections  and  lusts  thereof. 

3.  The  most  powerful  system,  by  which  the  Devil  ever 
corrupted  and  destroyed  the  gospel  of  Christ,  even  the 
great  mystery  of  iniquity,  has  its  foundation  in  a  skillful 
use  of  this  tendency  of  the  human  heart.  It  is  a  system 
expressly  designed  to  exclude  spiritual  crucifixion,  that  is, 
to  exclude  real  holiness,  and  to  replace  it  by  a  religion  of 
ceremonies  and  forms. 

4.  The  external  interpretation  tends  naturally  to  that  very 
view,  for  its  obvious  sense  is  to  make  external  baptism 
the  great  destroyer  of  sin,  and  the  great  defense  of  the 
church  against  it. 

5.  By  the  Fathers,  and  even  by  Augustine,  it  was 
practically  so  regarded.  He  did  not,  indeed,  exclude  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but  regarded  the  water,  when  consecrated,  as 
involving,  in  some  mysterious  way,  His  presence  ;  and 
though  he  threw  out  cautions  against  the  grosser  forms  of 
baptismal   regeneration,  yet,  the  practical  influence  of  his 

20 


234  rom.  vr,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  11  §  46 

Urgent  appeals  to  sinners,  to  come  to  the  baptimal  pool, 
and  wash  away  all  their  sins,  or  Imry  the  old  man,  etc. 
etc.,  could  not  possibly  have  but  one  result.  Baptism 
became  practically  the  great  thing  ;  and  on  it,  eternal 
life  or  eternal  death  seemed  to  hang.  And  in  all  this 
mournful  process,  the  external  interpretation  of  these  texts 
is  almost  the  great  moving  power  of  the  whole.  It  is 
hot  wise  to  give  any  one  cause  exclusive  power  in  forming 
the  Papal  system,  but  I  hesitate  not  to  say,  that  no  one 
cause  did  more  than  baptismal  regeneration ;  and  no  one 
cause  did  more  to  develop  and  mature  that  doctrine,  than 
the  external  interpretation  of  these  texts.  Of  this  fact, 
pages  of  proof  are  at  hand,  and,  if  any  One  desires,  can 
eaily  be  produced.  But,  to  those  who  have  examined 
enough  to  judge,  no  proof,  I  think,  can  be  needed. 

6.  No  modern  corrections  or  limitations  of  the  patris- 
tic interpretation  of  these  passages,  have  been  able  to 
neutralize  or  destroy  the  injurious  tendency  of  the  external 
views  ;  nor  can  it  be  done,  so  long  as  the  great  fact 
remains,  that  in  an  argument  designed  unanswerably  to 
prove  the  sanctifying  power  of  the  gospel,  an  external 
rite  comes  when  the  internal  energy  of  truth  and  the  Holy 
Spirit  ought  to  come*  The  external  rite,  if  admitted  at 
all  with  such  a  view,  wrests  and  distorts  the  great  outlines 
of  the  whole  picture.  It  is  not  the  glorious  gospel  that 
fills  the  mind,  as  held  by  all  real  Christians,  but  the  pecu- 
liar solemnity,  fitness,  and  significance  of  the  form  of 
immersion,  or  else  the  solemn  promises  made  when  im- 
mersed. And  on  a  mind  adverse  to  self  crucifixion,  and 
tending  to  self  complacency  and  censoriousness,  what 
must  be  the  moral  effect  of  such  appeals  as  these  :  "  Yes, 
my  brethren,  we  have  been  truly  baptized,  we  have  been 
immersed,  and  now  the  world  looks  to  us  for  a  proof  of 
its  sanctifying  powTer?"  Let  it  be  granted  that  these 
things  are  not  always  said  in  pride,  but  often  in  deep  and 


§   46  MORAL  TENDENCY  AND  EFFECTS.  235 

humble  sincerity.  But  what  art  can  extract  the  venom 
they  are  adapted  to  infuse,  or  prevent  the  inevitable  ten- 
dency to  magnify  certain  forms,  and  to  freeze  the  heart  of 
Christian  love  to  all  who  are  without  the  range  of  those 
forms  ?  In  multitudes  of  noble  spirits,  I  rejoice  to  record 
it,  the  last  effect  is  not  produced.  But  it  is  to  be  ascribed 
to  other  and  powerful  counteracting  causes,  whilst,  when 
no  such  counteracting  causes  exist,  the  venom  rages 
unchecked  ;  and  we  are  not  obscurely  told  that  it  is,  at 
least,  uncertain,  whether  a  person  unimmersed,  can  ever 
enter  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and  immersion,  as  of  old, 
practically  usurps  the  place  of  regeneration,  Among  the 
evangelical  Baptists  this,  indeed,  is  not  true  ;  other  causes 
prevent.  But  there  have  long  been  others  who  equal  or 
even  exceed  them  in  their  zeal  for  immersion,  and  even 
the  Mormonites  are  now  to  be  added  to  the  list.  If  there 
is  a  real  sanctifying  power  in  this  view,  why  are  such 
multitudes  of  men,  in  all  parts  of  our  land,  so  zealous  for 
It,  who  yet  give  no  signs  of  crucifying  the  flesh  with  the 
affection  and  lusts  thereof?  The  fact  cannot  be  denied. 
Why  is  it  so  ?  Is  it  not  because  it  presents,  as  a  cross 
to  be  taken  up,  a  mere  external  rite,  and  promises  in  some 
way  by  the  mysterious  operation  of  a  form,  to  enable  them 
to  escape  the  self  crucifixion  they  so  much  dread  ?  And 
can  holy  men,  men  of  prayer,  sustain  that  very  mode  of 
interpretation  on  which  it  all  rests,  and  not,  whether  they 
will  or  no,  confirm  such  men  in  their  views  ?  Let  all 
who  are  truly  holy  cut  loose  from  this  view,  and  soon 
the  unholy  will  sink  it  by  their  own  moral  gravitation, 
and  it  will  disappear. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  internal  interpretation  directs 
the  attention  of  Christians  directly  to  the  interior,  central, 
and  fundamental  work  of  self  crucifixion,  under  the 
influence  of  forgiving  love,  and  declares  that  true  and 
real  forgiveness    of   sin,    always  indicates  its&lf  by  the 


236  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  §  47 

destruction  of  the  flesh  with  the  affections  and  lusts  thereof, 
and  stimulates  and  aids  Christians,  in  the  highest  degree, 
by  example,  and  gratitude,  and  sympathy  between  the 
believer  and  Christ. 

It  is  no  small  loss  then  to  the  Christian  world  not  only 
to  lose  the  whole  power  of  these  passages  for  good,  but 
even  to  have  them  perverted  for  evil,  or  else  so  obscured 
in  the  smoke  of  controversy,  that  they  produce  almost  no 
effect,  except  to  awaken  in  the  mind  an  anxiety  to  know 
whether  they  do  mean  immersion  or  not.  Let  them  be 
redeemed  from  all  perversion  and  controversy,  and  let 
them  utter  in  clear  tones,  the  full  heart  of  Paul,  and  they 
will  arouse  the  whole  church  to  the  earnest  pursuit  of 
eminent  holiness  as  with  a  trumpet  call. 

§  47.  Objections  from  Authority  Considered. 

The  influence  of  authority,  with  many  minds,  is  great ; 
and  I  should  not  be  surprised  if  some  should  try  to  urge 
it  in  the  present  case,  in  view  of  opinions  so  numerous 
and  respectable  against  this  result.  To  this  with  all  de- 
ference I  would  make  the  following  reply  : 

1.  In  a  radical  discussion  of  the  question,  Are  the 
majority  right?  an  appeal  to  names  is  totally  illogical. 
This  is  manifestly  a  case  of  the  kind. 

2.  In  some  cases,  numbers  are  a  presumptive  argument 
of  error,  and  not  of  truth ;  i.  e.  in  the  case  of  old  errors, 
long  established,  and  never  thoroughly  re-investigated. 

3.  That  this  is  a  case  of  the  kind,  one  striking  proof 
will  clearly  show  ;  — -that  every  argument  for  the  external 
sense,  which  I  have  found  after  extended  search,  has 
rested  entirely  on  an  obvious,  yet  fundamental  mistake, 
(or  begging  the  question.)  I  refer  to  the  fact  that  in  every 
case  it  has  been  assumed,  without  proof,  or  even  an  effort 
at  proof,  that  the  baptism  spoken  of  is  external, —  just  as 
if  there  were  no  such  idea,  in  the  word  of  God,  as  internal 


§  47         OBJECTIONS  FROM  AUTHORITY  CONSIDERED,  23? 

baptism,  or  as  if  it  were  of  no  importance,  and,  therefore, 
it  is  always,  a  priori  probable  that  whenever  the  word  is 
used,  the  external  rite  is  meant,—-  so  probable  that  it  may 
always  be  assumed  without  proof,  Look  now  at  the  works 
of  Prof.  Chase,  Dr.  Carson,  and  Prof.  Ripley,  so  often 
alluded  to,  and  you  find  not  even  an  effort  to  prove,  phi- 
lologically,  that  the  baptism  is  external.  It  is  always 
assumed.  And  yet,  as  all  know,  this  is  a  fundamental 
point  in  the  discussion. 

What  then  are  the  facts  as  they  present  themselves  in 
the  New  Teslament?         *         *  *         (See  §  34.) 

If  these  facts  are  so,  where  is  the  a  priori  improbability 
that  internal  baptism  is  meant  in  Rom.  vi,  3,  which  all 
advocates  of  the  external  sense  have  assumed  ?  The  fact 
is' that  the  improbability,  from  the  very  form  of  language, 
is  altogether  against  external  baptism  ;  and  all,  who 
assume  it,  not  only  do  so  without  proof,  but  without  the 
possibility  of  proof,  and  against  clear  proof  to  the  contrary. 

No  more  striking  instance  can  be  given  of  the  influence 
of  a  technical  and  external  use  of  a  word,  without  any 
reference  to  its  spiritual  signification,  to  turn  away  the 
mind  from  the  true  sense  of  the  word  of  God.  For  in 
Eph.  iv,  5,  6,  as  well  as  in  Rom.  vi,  3,  and  1  Cor.  xii, 
13,  and  Gal.  iii,  27,  the  same  cause  has  entirely  hid  the 
true  and  spiritual  sense,  and  put  an  external  rite  where 
the  whole  context  demands  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
One  Lord,—  even  Jesus  Christ  who  made  atonement, — ■ 
one  faith,  or  glorious  system  of  truth  to  be  believed,  and 
one  regeneration  —  the  glorious  result  of  the  application 
of  that  truth  by  the  Holy  Spirit !  How  incongruous  to 
place  an  external  rite  on  such  relations,  and  especially,  so 
to  exalt  external  baptism,  and  to  say  nothing  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  ! 

Through  the  same  external,  formal  habit  of  mind,  the 
beautiful  and  spiritual  sense  of  Eph.  v,  2G,  has  been  lost. 


£3$  ROM.  Vx,  3,     4,  AND  COL.  II.   12.  §  4& 

though  the  washing  is  expressly  declared  to  bo  by  the 
word  of  God  ;  and  the  spiritual  sense  of  water  is  over* 
looked,  though  God  has  expressly  used  it  as  a  symbol  of 
truth  :  "  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean." 

So  also  the  spiritual  sense  of  Titus  iii,  5,  is  drowned 
beneath  the  flood  of  external  baptismal  regeneration, 
though  the  language  is  exactly  adapted  to  express  the 
beginning  and  progress  of  spiritual  life,  or  regeneration 
and  sanctification — "the  washing  of  regeneration" 
denoting  the  first,  and  "renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost '* 
the  progressive  sanctification,  caused  by  abundant  effu- 
sions of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Finally,  not  only  is  it  true  that  external  baptism  is  not 
meant  in  Kom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12,  but  it  is  also  true 
that  there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  any  part  of  the  lan- 
guage is  taken  from  that  rite.     For, 

1.  Even  had  there  been  no  external  rite,  but  internal 
baptism  only,  the  force  of  the  analogy  would  have  called 
for  the  use  of  burial  in  both  of  these  passages.  In  speak- 
ing of  the  spiritual  crucifixion,  death,  and  resurrection  of 
the  believer,  how  could  Paul  help  inserting  burial  ? 

2.  The  real  origin  of  the  language  is  obvious,  Christ 
was  buried  in  fact,  as  well  as  crucified,  and  the  same  series 
of  events  that  furnished  to  Paul  all  the  rest  of  his  figures, 
would  naturally  furnish  this. 

3.  The  genius  and  habits  of  Paul's  mind  demand  this 
origin  ;  for  it  was  not  external  baptism  that  was  daily 
before  his  mind,  but  the  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of 
Christ. 

4.  The  supposed  connection  or  similitude  between  the 
word  baptizoand  burial,  does  not  exist,  forbaptizo  means 
to  purify,  and  therefore,  would  not  suggest  the  idea  of 
burial.  Such,  then,  is  the  proof  of  the  position  originally 
stated,  that  the  baptism,  burial,  resurrection,  etc.,  spoken 
of  in  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12.  are  all  internal,  and 
that  the  passage  does  not  refer  to  the  external  rite  at  all, 
nor  derive  any  of  its  language  from  it ;  but  that  the  lan- 
guage would  have  been  just  as  it  is,  if  the  rite  had  been 
administered  by  sprinkling  alone,  or  even  if  there  had 
been  no  external  rite  whatever. 


§  49  apostolic  practice  considered.  239 

§  48.  Apostolic  Practice  Considered. 

After  what  has  been  said,  but  few  words  are  needed  on 
this  point.     It  is  plain, 

1.  That  to  us  it  is  of  very  little  consequence,  what  their 
practice  was  ;  for  the  command  was  only  to  purify,  and 
God  attaches  no  importance  to  any  one  mode  rather  than 
another. 

2.  It  is  not  possible  decisively  to  prove  the  mode  used 
by  the  Apostles ;  for  if  going  to  rivers,  going  down  to 
the  water  and  up  from  it,  etc.,  create  a  presumption  in 
favor  of  immersion,  so  does  the  baptism  of  three  thousand 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  in  a  city  where  water  was  scarce, 
and  of  the  jailor  in  a  prison,  create  a  presumption  in  favor 
of  sprinkling.  And  if  a  possibility  of  immersion  can  be 
shown  in  the  latter  cases,  so  can  a  possibility  of  sprink- 
ling or  pouring  be  shown  in  the  former. 

3.  The  command  being  to  purify,  and  the  facts  being 
as  stated,  the  decided  probability  is  that  either  sprinkling, 
pouring,  or  immersion  was  allowed,  and  Christian  liberty 
was  everywhere  enjoyed. 

4.  A  tendency  to  formalism  led  to  a  misinterpretation 
of  Paul  in  Rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  Col.  ii,  12,  and  this  gave 
the  ascendency  to  immersion,  which  increased,  as  before 
stated,  till  it  became  general,  though  it  was  not  insisted 
on  as  absolutely  essential  on  philological  grounds. 

5.  Various  causes,  even  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
at  length  produced  a  relaxation  of  this  excessive  rigor  of 
practice.  And  most  Protestants  at  the  Reformation  took 
the  same  ground.     But, 

6.  A  mistake  in  philology,  after  the  Reformation* 
introduced  a  practice  stricter  and  more  severe  than  even 
that  of  the  Fathers,  and  which  reprobates  Christian  liberty 
on  this  subject,  as  a  corruption  of  the  word  of  God  ; 
because  various  causes  induced  even  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  to  relax  a  little  of  the  excessive  strictness  of 
antiquity.  I  know  that  all  that  comes  from  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  is  a  priori  suspicious.  But  bad  as  that 
Church  is,  no  one  can  deny  that  there  is  some  truth  there. 
The  view  I  have  advanced,  I  hold,  not  on  her  authority, 
but  on  its  own  merits.  And  I  will  not  reject  or  deny  a 
truth,  even  if  it  is  found  in  a  corrupt  church. 


240  rom.  vi,  3,  4,  and  col.  ii,  12.  2  49 

§  49.    The  Final  Result. 

It  appears,  then,  tliat  the  whole  subject  turns  on  three 
points  :  1,  the  import  of  baptizo  ;  2,  the  significance  of 
the  rite  ;  3,  early  practice.  On  each,  the  argument  in 
favor  of  immersion  rests  on  begging  the  question.  1.  It 
i^  assumed  as  improbable  that  baptizo  can  mean  purify, 
without  regard  to  mode,  if  it  also  means,  in  other  cases, 
immerse.  The  falsehood  of  this  assumption  has  been 
shown,  the  existence  of  an  opposite  probability  proved, 
and  the  meaning  purify  clearly  established  by  facts.  2. 
The  improbability  of  internal  baptism  in  Rom.  vi,  3,  4, 
and  Col.  ii,  12,  has  been  assumed,  and  external  baptism 
has  also  been  assumed  without  proof.  It  has  been  shown 
that  the  external  sense,  and  not  the  internal  sense,  is 
improbable,  and  that  against  the  external  sense  there  is 
decisive  proof.  It  has  also  been  assumed  that  the  prac- 
tice of  immersion  by  the  Fathers  and  others,  is  proof  of 
their  philology,  and  that,  therefore,  they  must  have 
regarded  the  command  to  baptize  as  a  command  to  im- 
merse. The  falsehood  of  this  assumption  has  also  been 
shown.  The  result  of  the  whole  is,  that  as  to  the  mode 
of  purification  we  may  enjoy  Christian  liberty  ;  and  that 
immeasurable  evils  attend  the  operation  of  those  principles, 
by  which  many  are  now  endeavoring  to  bring  the  Church 
upon  exclusive  ground.  There  is  no  objection  to  immer- 
sion, merely  as  one  mode  of  purification,  to  all  who  desire 
it.  But  to  immersion  as  the  divinely  ordained  and  only 
mode,  there  are  objections  deep  and  radical.  We  cannot 
produce  unity  by  sanctioning  a  false  principle  ;  our  Bap- 
tist brethren  can,  by  coming  to  the  ground  of  Christian 
liberty.  The  conclusion,  then,  to  which  I  would  kindly, 
humbly,  affectionately,  yet  decidedly  come  is  this  :  "Stand 
fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  hath  made  us  free,  and 
be  not  entangled  again  with  the  yoke  of  bondage." 

The  whole  argument  is  now  closed.     I  intend,  however,  . 
to  add   another  part  to   the  work, —  should  my  life  be 
spared  a  little  longer,  to  embrace  the  scripture  warrant 
for  the  membership  and  baptism  of  infants. 


